On 02/17/2017 05:16 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Friday 2017-02-17 06:33, Bernhard M. Wiedemann wrote:
I assume, we want to keep the concept of .pyc files, since they provide some performance gain[...] But why do we have to ship .pyc files as part of our binary rpms? They waste disk space and bandwidth for our mirrors and users. They could be created in a %post or %posttrans hook when installing the rpm (or do they need special build deps?)
- It could prolong the installation time. - rpm -qi's Size field is further away from the real installation size ("yast said it would take 1.2GB now it's 2.0.."-kind of thing) - Creating them in %post, i.e. directly on the end-user system, in a way defeats the purpose of a precompiled distribution.
The other reason is if you don't package them, you need to add specific code in the %postun to check if they were created (the user may install and never run them) then remove them if the exist. Making sure this happens for each pyc file is often alot more effort then just packaging them especially if subdirectories are involved.
It might even be, that compiling them on the destination is faster than transferring and unpacking the LZMA compressed version.
Feel free to take numbers on a 32-bit Raspberry :-p
-- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B