Yeah, I caught that this morning. Seems like the test/ directory is causing 
more trouble than I though, huh ;-) ? I'm in the process of applying a custom 
patch to lib/python2.1/ that adds a new parameter and code suite 
to compile_dir() to accept a list of dir. names to skip over during the 
recursive traversal. This way we can specify to skip over test/ entirely 
(without deleting or moving it) and no matter how the installer changes, as 
long as it calls compileall.compile_dir() it should work. I'd like to change 
inst/ to import this custom module instead of looking at the 
standard library module (until perhaps I can have this merged into python's 

What's the best way to submit patchs (esp. multi-file ones?)  Also, are you 
going to (or have already) rebuild the binary packages for beta4 so linux 
users can test them? Most people won't know about this bug, and it's too 
small (and premature) to be a hotfix.

I should have something by the end of the weekend.


On Friday 18 January 2002 02:25 pm, you wrote:
> Eron Lloyd wrote:
> >Chris (or anybody else),
> >
> >Have you tried to install Beta4 using the linux binary package yet? I'm
> >trying to write a patch against it but the installation does in fact bomb
> > out each time I try to run it, even freshly untarred. The source TGZ
> > works fine and dandy, however. It seems has been
> > dramatically changed since Beta3, as if to try and surpress the stdout
> > messages. I'm going to try and break it down and find out where the
> > exceptions are flagging, and also refactor my patch so it doesn't depend
> > on the changes being made to I don't like wrapping a gag
> > around code if I don't have to, and I'd rather this stuff be written to
> > an install log or something.
> >
> >I-see-a-fishbowl-proposal-for-a-new-installer-ly yours,
> >
> >Eron
> Hi Eron,
> One of the engineers snuck in a last minute change to "fix" the install
> process to not install if compilation of any module fails.  However, the
> test suite for Python itself has some modules that don't compile, and
> they're causing the newly "fixed" installer to complain.
> In the file inst/, you can delete the section that says
> (starting at about line 45):
>     if not success:
>             ....
> to the end of the file and rerun the install program.
> This one was particularly aggravating because the beta 4 release is only
> supposed to include bugfixes, not 'features'.  Clearly, I distingush
> between a bug fix which fixes an existing problem causing Zope to not
> work vs a feature which causes an otherwise working Zope to cease
> functioning.  :)
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> **  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
> (Related lists -
> )

Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to