[Python-Dev] PEP 3149 thoughts
barry at python.org
Wed Sep 8 00:45:41 CEST 2010
On Sep 05, 2010, at 07:22 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>I know the PEP is accepted, but I would still like to see some
>1. What is the effect of this PEP on Windows? Is this a Linux-only
> feature? If not, who is going to provide the changes for Windows?
> (More specifically: if this is indeed meant for Windows, and
> if no Windows implementation arrives before 3.2b1, I'd ask that
> the changes be rolled back, and integration is deferred until there
> is Windows support)
I only mandated ./configure-based builds to be PEP 3149 conforming. I have no
objection to expanding the PEP to include Windows builds, but I'm not sure
it's necessary and it would take a Windows build expert to make and test those
Does PEP 3149 have any advantage for Windows installations?
>2. Why does the PEP recommend installing stuff
It's just a suggestion, but as it turns out, probably an incorrect one. I'll
rephrase this to make it clear that it's up to the distribution as to where
exactly these files get installed. Nothing about this PEP changes the default
from-source installation directory.
> According to the Linux FHS, /usr/share is for Architecture-
> independent data, see
> In particular, it's objective is that you can NFS-share it across,
> say, both SPARC Linux and x86 Linux. I believe the PEP would break
> this, as SPARC and x86 executables would override each other.
>3. When the PEP recommends that stuff gets installed into pyshared,
> why does the patch then not implement this recommendation, but
> continues installing files into lib-dynload?
See above. It is not the intent of this PEP to change the installation
directories. Distributions have all the other tools they need to get the
files into the right place for their layouts.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Python-Dev