Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:55:40 +0100 From: "Vlad K." <vlad-fbsd@acheronmedia.com> To: freebsd-python@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lang/python3* ports, __pycache__ included Message-ID: <9eb517ced907838f7c604427a01d659f@acheronmedia.com> In-Reply-To: <e1794d8c-9dd0-80b5-e045-3953cd7af8aa@FreeBSD.org> References: <CACNAnaEueRdkEuuf9MmZwqqaz8HB6hSW14a_VmqZ9%2B8ub3235g@mail.gmail.com> <ema74d97cd-d111-4740-909d-419a4d12c8a6@hora> <CACNAnaF1=D-P0ZTbZP7Wt=BBoWwmDnwe=-mRmz%2Bga_H__zk4-g@mail.gmail.com> <fef69799-bee5-d836-70cf-d928707ccfdb@FreeBSD.org> <f2f8f2765108cafb3f0c1b931e6314a1@acheronmedia.com> <e1794d8c-9dd0-80b5-e045-3953cd7af8aa@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2016-12-13 12:36, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > > My main point was that if disk utilisation is something one wants to > minimise (at deployment), that one would need to be able to turn the > optimization knob off each time (or system-wide) and that that would be > a handy thing to know and do. Personally, I'd love if Python could specify a base dir for bytecode cache, but it seems that's not gonna happen: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0304/ > Said another way, even if we (FreeBSD) de-packaged optimization files > which we want to do, that that *by itself* that would only save package > repository size and bandwidth, not deployment size. But in reality, what kind of gain/loss are we talking about here? I'm guessing it's pretty insignificant in this day and age, even for embedded? -- Vlad K.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9eb517ced907838f7c604427a01d659f>