[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Python 3 binaries
From: |
Andreas Enge |
Subject: |
Re: Python 3 binaries |
Date: |
Sun, 8 Sep 2013 20:35:34 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
Hello, time to give a quick update!
What I implemented in the python branch, following the discussions
on the list, is the following:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 08:24:48AM +0200, Brandon Invergo wrote:
> > Then that means we don’t really have to worry, and just document that
> > the python-3.x package is an unmodified upstream package, with its
> > binary is called ‘python3’.
> I think that is a fine way to do it. The most important part is
> internal consistency. It seems that the "unmodified upstream" strategy
> is the path of least resistance, and it will fit with the expectations
> of all of the Debian-based users out there.
There are unmodified binaries for Python 2.7.5 and Python 3.3.2
(which should probably be updated to 3.4.0).
> As for the shebangs, you may well still have to do some patching for
> some packages, if they were written in python3 but the shebang is for
> /usr/bin/python.
Then there is a package called "python-wrapper", which simply adds the
following symlinks into the Python 3 bin/ directory:
idle -> idle3
pydoc -> pydoc3
python -> python3
It is used internally as an input, so that shebangs need not be rewritten;
but users may also install it if they wish Python 3 binaries known under
the name of "python" etc., without also installing Python 2.
Simple packages compile, and once a few problems with the build system are
solved, I should be able to add setuptools, which will pave the way for more
modules.
Andreas