[opensuse-packaging] Re: python installing modules to /usr/local by default - good or bad?

Dne 2.10.2012 15:09, todd rme napsal(a):

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Jan Matejek wrote:

...

Dne 27.9.2012 18:23, Claudio Freire napsal(a):

...

Why do you think the patches aren't upstreamable?

Because the change would be unsystematic - to do this "properly", parts of distutils would have to be redesigned and that's out of scope of any of our bugs ;e) The patch would be implementing a special behavior in order to conform to FHS, introducing possible compatibility problems (modules confused about their whereabouts), when all the while Python itself hits a couple of FHS gray areas anyway.

Actual solution might be to cooperate with Debian on their "dist-packages" thing and try to upstream that.

Why couldn't the patch merely implement a more flexible way to handle prefixes, and then we override the default in our packages?

Because that's not "merely". The problem is that Python only recognizes one (*) location for site-specific packages, and we need to distinguish two: vendor-provided vs. user-provided. It is already easy enough to specify prefix on command line to force installation somewhere else, and as of now, our Pythons are preconfigured to set that prefix to /usr/local. This causes bnc#658604. I could do this differently so that this bug goes away and behavior remains the same, but original reasoning for "why do / not do this" remains the same as well. * - Actually two, but one is platform-dependent and one is platform independent. We use that to install and support noarch pythonic packages, but it doesn't help in this case.

-Todd

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org