OK, here is the original quoting. A user has both arch specific and non-arch specific parts of a package and needs to decide which parts to place under sitelib and which under sitearch.
Jesse's (wrong) answer is that if one needs to get into sitearch it pulls the rest into there, too. It's not about files with the same name under sitearch and sitelib as Jesse later explained, it's about a package like python-elementtree and friends that has some parts that are arch specific and some parts that are not. And there is no need to move everything to sitearch contrary to Jesse's statement.
Everything clear as mud? Removing too much in quoting generates this kind of confusion.
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 10:48:11AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 16:40 +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 16:34 +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
I am working on packaging cohoba, this is a python gui client/mission control for telepathy. It has one small .c file, so I have a few questions:
- because of the .c file the package has to by arch-specific i guess. Is
there a strong preference to package as noarch? (the c part is used for changing the name for killall, so to put it as noarch i can just leave that part out (not being able to killall cohoba), or add a dependency on python-ctypes and add a small patch to cohoba to use ctypes to do it instead)
If it can use all pure python, that would be best for the upstream project. Why reinvent the wheel?
i didn't want to send yet, so i'll continue:
- should i just not care about arch vs noarch and package as arch
specific, then where must i place the modules, all in python_sitelib and only osutils (the c one) in python_sitearch?
thanks for any pointers
Due to the way that python works, if any part of a python's module is arch specific (sitearch), the entire thing has to go into sitearch. Python will not import part from sitearch and part from sitelib. So it'd all have to go in sitearch.
On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 18:11 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
OK, here is the original quoting. A user has both arch specific and non-arch specific parts of a package and needs to decide which parts to place under sitelib and which under sitearch.
Jesse's (wrong) answer is that if one needs to get into sitearch it pulls the rest into there, too. It's not about files with the same name under sitearch and sitelib as Jesse later explained, it's about a package like python-elementtree and friends that has some parts that are arch specific and some parts that are not. And there is no need to move everything to sitearch contrary to Jesse's statement.
Everything clear as mud? Removing too much in quoting generates this kind of confusion.
No, too much assuming causes these problems. I said "Due to the way that python works, if any part of a python's module". However you assumed I was speaking about a python module PACKAGE. Now, did I say Package? No, I said module. Pretty hard to remove a quote that didn't exist. Please don't put words in my mouth.
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 12:16:08PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 18:11 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
OK, here is the original quoting. A user has both arch specific and non-arch specific parts of a package and needs to decide which parts to place under sitelib and which under sitearch.
Jesse's (wrong) answer is that if one needs to get into sitearch it pulls the rest into there, too. It's not about files with the same name under sitearch and sitelib as Jesse later explained, it's about a package like python-elementtree and friends that has some parts that are arch specific and some parts that are not. And there is no need to move everything to sitearch contrary to Jesse's statement.
Everything clear as mud? Removing too much in quoting generates this kind of confusion.
No, too much assuming causes these problems. I said "Due to the way that python works, if any part of a python's module". However you assumed I was speaking about a python module PACKAGE. Now, did I say Package? No, I said module. Pretty hard to remove a quote that didn't exist. Please don't put words in my mouth.
OK, so in your POV a user asked whether it is OK to place foo.py and bar.so in sitelib and sitearch respectively and you answer that baz.py can't be installed under both sitearch and sitelib.
I think it's better to admit the original error instead. :)
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org