On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Akira Kitada <akitada@gmail.com> wrote:
In my opinion, bdist_rpm and the like are "nice hacks" at best and nothing more. Peoplo who love rigorous distribution or control freaks would probably prefer to bother packaging themselves and that will leads them to use apt, yum...
I think there's a slight misunderstanding here on what bdist_rpm does : it creates a rmp file you can then use with yum, it doesn't install anything. It does it by taking the metadata out of your setup.py file and make a rmp file with RPM own metadata structure. see http://docs.python.org/dev/distutils/builtdist.html
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Akira Kitada <akitada@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Tarek,
I think "apt, yum, etc" would be also used for packaging/distributing apps.
There is already a command that let you create a rpm package (bdist_rpm) out of a python package,
There were also a bdist_deb project but it never made it to distutils, also for Debian there's a policy on how to work with python packages : http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/
Last, this mailing list had a lot of threads about the fact that there's no standard way in Python to work with resources that could be installed in the system, using a LSB-compliant approach.
So I don't have (I think no one does at this point) any clear view of what could be done in this area.
Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/
-- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/