FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-20-2010, 11:53 AM
Zac Medico
 
Default Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

On 03/20/2010 02:56 AM, Jean-Marc Hengen wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>> ...
>
> ++ - I can only add the saying "With freedom comes great responsibility.".
>
> Maybe the python herd could maintain a little status page which covers
> informations like:
> - Estimated python 3 compatibility in respect to the packages in the
> main tree.

That would be easy enough to generate from dependencies. Surely
there are some dependencies that need to be updated, but that
shouldn't be much work. For example, I've already updated the
cracklib and libxml2 deps to indicate lack of python3 support.

> - Recommendations if installing makes sense or not (e.g. package X gains
> feature Y with python 3).
> - Recommendations if setting python 3 as system engine makes already
> sense or not.
> This way gentoo can give its users the tools needed to make a good
> decision if python 3 makes sense on his system. For me as a user I need
> more time to study if an action makes sense than implementing said
> action (e.g. locally masking python 3 - It would not be the first time
> masking a package). If one isn't into python, it gets even more complicated.

I would advise people to go ahead and install it as long as they can
spare a little disk space and cpu time. Anybody who is tight on
those resources should feel free to mask it (and the dependency
resolver will certainly notify you if this is not feasible in your
case). Honestly, I don't see a need for lots of data analysis here,
but maybe some people just like that kind of thing.
--
Thanks,
Zac
 
Old 03-20-2010, 01:07 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Default Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

2010-03-20 13:51:37 Peter Hjalmarsson napisał(a):
> I have a question related to this:
>
> If I have package X which supports python2 and python 3, and I install
> it without python3 installed it will only install python2-files
> (i.e. /usr/lib/python2.x/*), right?
> What happens if I later install packages Y that is only python3, and
> relies on the python3 parts of package X? Can this happen and how will
> the PM handle that (reemerge package X installing the python3 parts or
> fail to compile package Y due to missing python module)?

As the news item says, you should run python-updater after installation
of Python 3.1.

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Old 03-20-2010, 01:11 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Default Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

2010-03-20 01:51:44 Duncan napisał(a):
> So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a news
> item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked, and suggest
> that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it themselves, with a
> link to documentation with specific instructions and a bit more detail on
> why they might wish to mask it and under what circumstances they might not.
>
> I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news item.

Python 3 is not masked. The discussion is about stabilization.

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Old 03-23-2010, 02:37 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Default Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

2010-03-22 22:12:54 Jacob Godserv napisał(a):
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:11, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
> <Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 2010-03-20 01:51:44 Duncan napisał(a):
> >> So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a news
> >> item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked, and suggest
> >> that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it themselves, with a
> >> link to documentation with specific instructions and a bit more detail on
> >> why they might wish to mask it and under what circumstances they might not.
> >>
> >> I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news item.
> >
> > Python 3 is not masked. The discussion is about stabilization.
>
> Duncan's comments still apply, though, right? What's against writing a
> news item about stabilizing Python?

There is already a thread about news item:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_814e67764c17f88bde94f22e9a392e4f.xml

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
 
Old 03-23-2010, 03:15 PM
Duncan
 
Default Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis posted on Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:37:34
+0100 as excerpted:

> 2010-03-22 22:12:54 Jacob Godserv napisał(a):
>> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:11, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
>> <Arfrever@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > 2010-03-20 01:51:44 Duncan napisał(a):
>> >> So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a
>> >> news item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked,
>> >> and suggest that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it
>> >> themselves, with a link to documentation with specific instructions
>> >> and a bit more detail on why they might wish to mask it and under
>> >> what circumstances they might not.
>> >>
>> >> I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news
>> >> item.
>> >
>> > Python 3 is not masked. The discussion is about stabilization.
>>
>> Duncan's comments still apply, though, right? What's against writing a
>> news item about stabilizing Python?
>
> There is already a thread about news item:
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/
msg_814e67764c17f88bde94f22e9a392e4f.xml

(link wrapped)

But that doesn't mention that users may wish to package.mask it, to avoid
having it on their systems at all. That's what /I/ was suggesting in
/this/ thread, that a news item (presumably that one) should mention the
package.mask option.

That really does seem to be about the best compromise, given the situation
as described so well in this thread.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:39 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org