[Python-Dev] Python-Dev Digest, Vol 84, Issue 112 (original) (raw)

John Nagle nagle at animats.com
Sun Jul 25 07:08:07 CEST 2010

Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 23:59:14 +0200 From:schmir at gmail.com To: Barry Warsaw<barry at python.org> Cc: Ronald Oussoren<ronaldoussoren at mac.com>,python-dev at python.org Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] versioned .so files for Python 3.2 Message-ID:<87aapgbky5.fsf at brainbot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Barry Warsaw<barry at python.org> writes:

> On Jul 23, 2010, at 01:46 PM,schmir at gmail.com wrote: > >>Doesn't anybody else think this is lost work for very little gain? My >>/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages directory consumes 200MB on disk. I >>couldn't care less if my /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages consumed the >>same amount of disk space... > > Right, you probably don't care now that your extension modules live in foo.so > so it probably won't make much difference if they were named foo-blahblah.so, > as long as they import.:) Most of the time it won't make much difference, right. But I can assure you, that it will bite some people and there is some code to be adapted. > > If you use Debian or Ubuntu though, it'll be a win for you by allow us to make > Python support much more robust. I'd much prefer to have cleanly separated environments by having separate directories for my python modules. Sharing the source code and complicating things will not lead to increased robustness. - Ralf

Debian's policy on Python packaging calls for maximum separation

between versions. See

"http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/"

This keeps the system updaters from becoming confused, and reduces the risk that an update to one version of Python will break another version.

            John Nagle

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list