Re: [PATCH 22/31] gnu: Add python-pycrypto.

[David Thompson]

Eric Bavier <address@hidden> writes:

> David Thompson writes:
>
>> * gnu/packages/python.scm (python-pycrypto, python2-pycrypto): New variables.
>> ---
>>  gnu/packages/python.scm | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/python.scm b/gnu/packages/python.scm
>> index 2e16838..886dc03 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages/python.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/python.scm
>> @@ -1598,3 +1598,35 @@ somewhat intelligeble.")
>>  (define-public python2-pyjwt
>>    (package-with-python2 python-pyjwt))
>>  
>> +(define-public python-pycrypto
>
> As I pointed out on IRC, this package is redundant with the one added in
> cafc3f5a.
>

Thanks for letting me know.  Not sure how I missed that.  This patch
will be dropped.

>> +    (inputs
>> +     `(("python" ,python) ;; need libpython3.3m
>> +       ("python-setuptools" ,python-setuptools)
>> +       ("gmp" ,gmp)))
>
> Should python-setuptools perhaps go in native-inputs (this question
> applies to the other patches sent in this batch as well)?  Not all of
> the existing python packages follow this, but maybe they should.
> Someone more practiced with cross-compilation might know better.

I was wondering about that myself, and also whether to make the test
suite dependencies native inputs as well.  From what I could tell, using
native inputs doesn't work the way you'd hope when using
'package-with-python2'.  Not totally sure, though, I didn't explore it
very much.

Since there's some uncertainty, could we leave setuptools as a regular
input for now and address it later?

-- 
David Thompson
Web Developer - Free Software Foundation - http://fsf.org
GPG Key: 0FF1D807
Support the FSF: https://fsf.org/donate