Python versions (was Re: os.execl())

Grant Edwards grante at
Mon Aug 27 20:03:21 CEST 2001

In article <uu1lot4hcueu0m6av968nrmkknejs6d45p at>, Sheila King wrote:

> This is one of the reasons that I've been trying to write my
> scripts so that they will still run on 1.5.2. I imagine quite a
> few hosts out there, who run RH out of the box will only be
> offering 1.5.2.

Yea, I maintain a Python program that we distribute with one of
our products.  Until RedHat starts installing 2.0, I have to
support 1.5.2 also.  :(

> Plus, there is the whole thing, with some people not even
> wanting to touch the RH 7.x. (I don't understand all the issues
> around this, but the fact is that even if RH does update their
> Python in their install routines, that some people don't even
> want to use the latest RH, for some reason...)

The last few x.0 distributions from RH haven't been pretty --
and they seem to be getting worse.  6.0 had quite a few
problems, and 7.0 was a disaster.  7.1 is usable, but it still
has Python 1.5.2 as the "default" Python, though 2.0 is
available as an optional package.  Some of the RH system
administration stuff was/is written in Python (both the
installer and rpm started life as a Python program, IIRC), and
I guess it's too much work to get it all working under 2.[01].

The good news is that everybody w/ RH has Python.  The bad news
is that it's so intimately connected with the system that it
doesn't get updated the way it would if it were just another
optional package.

Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  I'm not available
                                  at               for comment...

More information about the Python-list mailing list