Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 03:31:29 -0800 From: Alexander Botero-Lowry <alexbl@FreeBSD.org> To: pav@FreeBSD.org Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.org, vd@FreeBSD.org, python@FreeBSD.org, ports-developers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The way to fix ports/104560 Message-ID: <20070123112924.4023339F66@cherenkov.geekfire.com> In-Reply-To: <1169549704.6221.10.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> References: <20070123104738.GA41157@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <1169549704.6221.10.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Please take a look at ports/104560 (and also ports/105853 and
> > ports/106120) and come to a consensus what is the right way to fix this
> > issue.
> >=20
> > I am sure we can come to an agreement and shortly commit a fix.
>
> As I see it:
>
> - lang/python metaport must be removed
> - all lang/python2? ports will install $PREFIX/bin/python binary
>
> How that sounds?
>
> Or if people absolutely need to have several different pythons on a
> system, make the bin/python automatical symlink, like in perl ports.
This fails to deal with installing the site-packages in the appropriate
site-package directories. The same site-package directory can't be used
because the pyc and pyo format changes between python implementations,
so python needs to be able to generate the appropriate wants per python
installation.
For ports that use USE_PYDISTUTILS (which is the most common way to install
a python package) ${PYTHON} is used, so I don't see why other ports shouldn't
follow the convention.
I do _agree_ that something should always be installed as python, without
version, but that doesn't mean that ports should just assume python when
installing. They should use ${PYTHON} to be safe, and to make sure things
are installed where the user wants them to be installed.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070123112924.4023339F66>