Re: [PATCH v3] gnu: Add python2-shedskin.

[Leo Famulari]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 02:13:24PM +0200, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2016 18:19:09 -0400
> Leo Famulari <address@hidden> wrote:
> > If it works, then I think it's better than propagating pcre and libgc.
> 
> It does work. 
> 
> However, shedskin creates C++ source files and a Makefile. The user then has 
> to manually compile them via "make".
> So you have to have make and g++ installed in your profile in order to be 
> able to actually have a native executable.
> Now it refers to the libgc and pcre that shedskin used while it was 
> installed, so you don't have to install those.
> Not sure whether that's better than having the profile contain pcre and 
> libgc, though.

My instinct is that we should make it refer directly to the libraries
(pcre and libgc) but that user-facing executables like make and g++
should be installed by the user.

For example, our git package requires the user to install an ssh client
if they want to work with remote repositories. And our rsync package
also requires the user to install an ssh client for typical usage.

The examples may not be 100% relevant; is shedskin totally useless
without make and g++?

I'm not sure if there's an explicit policy on this subject. 

> > Is the 'examples' directory included in the package when installed?
> 
> No. Should it?

You know better than me :)