[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Hmmm, may be you are right about this, but looking at > /var/lib/dpkg/info/python-tmda.list I see entries such as: > > /usr/lib/python2.1/site-packages/TMDA > /usr/lib/python2.1/site-packages/TMDA/ChangeLog > /usr/lib/python2.1/site-packages/TMDA/Cookie.py > /usr/lib/python2.1/site-packages/TMDA/Defaults.py > ...
Right. So, this packaged TMDA will only work with Python 2.1. Other Python releases won't be able to locate the TMDA modules. > Also, for the python-tmda and tmda 0.61 packages, I also see: > > Depends: python (>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2) > Depends: python (>= 2.1), python (<< 2.2), python-tmda (= 0.61-1), debconf > > respectively. I was under the impression that "<<" means "strictly > less than" in this context -- so I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling. I don't know enough about Debian to help here, but if there is a restriction on Python 2.2, that is wrong. 2.2 is the recommended version on http://tmda.net/requirements.html. > Because of the way you have structured the TMDA installation, it's > pretty easy to backup as well as remove (-; (I really appreciate > this kind of structure -- one of the main reasons I use packaging > systems is for the ability to cleanly remove installed packages -- > with TMDA it appears to be pretty easy w/o the packaging system). This is nice to hear. I also think the structure is easy to maintain because the directory acts as a self-contained unit, as opposed to spreading files all around creation (/etc, /usr/local/bin, etc.). To upgrade or downgrade can be as easy as changing one symlink. Running directly out of the "source" directory seems to confuse some people though (judging by the many questions/complaints about this on tmda-users). > BTW, you don't have any plans to change from this structure, right? Right. _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
