PyQt setup on Linux Mandrake 8.2

RA ralf_ahlbrink at
Sun Sep 22 14:55:58 EDT 2002

On Sat, 21 Sep 2002 17:08:17 +0000, djw wrote:

> <snip>
>> Unfortunately, Mandrake is somewhat more perl than python biased.
> Do you mean there is more support/newer versions of Perl or is it more 
> of a philosophical thing: There are many ways vs. there is one way?

I don't know if it is a philosophic issue. But nearly all configuration 
software is perl. And they use gtk as gui for those apps. So, don't expect
a rapidly updated PyQt.

> <snip>
>> If you know a bit about RPM, perhaps you, dwelch, can manage
>> to update these packages (rpm -Uhv xx.src.rpm, a few changes ..., 
>> rpm -ba SPECS/sip.spec).
>> Otherwise you could contact me. In about a week I've got time
>> to do this.
> Uhhh... considering my extreme novice status on Linux and especially 
> RPMs (as witnessed by my problems), I don't think I am the right person 
> for this task.

Just an excerpt from sip.spec:

mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/python2.2/site-packages
%{__python} -q %{_libdir}/qt3 -b $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir} \
    -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/python2.2/site-packages
cd siplib
%make staticlib

If you don't want to build a RPM, you can nevertheless use the info
from the .spec for your question about the qt issue. So try something like
"python -q /usr/lib/qt3"

> <snip>
>> The RPM  stuff (or DEB) has got real advantages compared to 
>> "setup.exe". 
>> And if the offered versions are outdated, fetch the
>> new source, learn from the (e.g.) sip.spec file somewhat about
>> the compilation, and make a new package!
> Well, here I have to disagree (at least from a user's perspective). 
> Having come from over 10yrs of Windows development experience (including 
> writing Windows installers from scratch), I find RPM package management 
> (can't say about DEB format, never used it) to be very complex, 
> difficult, and it rarely works for me.

I haven't got any experience with building Windows installers. So, I can't
compare both procedures. And I don't know, how you felt at the beginning
of your Windows installer exp.
I meant the _end_ users comfort. Perhaps you know, what files get
installed and which registry entries were set. But I believe (not sure)
that you have to use some third party "auditing" software. With rpm or deb
you've got a database for installed files. With linux you often use
more than one version of a library. The packages should "know" which
version they need. If you want to use another version (library or main 
package) you or someone else has to rebuild the package.

Now I will stop with this (somewhat) offtopic stuff.

> Case in point is two systems I tried to install at work... one Mandrake 
> 8.x and one Windows 2000. The packages I was installing were Python 
> 2.2.1 with a bunch of extensions like MySQLdb and mxDateTime, MySQL 4.0, 
> Jabber x.xx (can't remember version) and an FTP daemon. The Windows box 
> was up and running in less than an hour after running a handful of 
> setup.exe-type programs, and the Linux box still wasn't fully installed 
> after two days of trying. I completely gave up trying to upgrade a copy 
> of MySQL 3.23 to 4.0 after every way I tried failed. In the end, the 
> system became corrupted that I had to re-install Linux (probably a real 
> Linux person would laugh at this, but after a while /usr/bin got so 
> filled with junk that I didn't know what I had anymore and wanted to 
> start over "clean").

It would be certainly better if you install self compiled stuff in 
/usr/local/ (or control the installation with rpm).

> Not to say that this sort of thing doesn't happen in Windows-land, but 
> setup.exe works on 99% of the packages I have tried 99% of the time. 
> Don't get me wrong, I really like Linux, but this is one area where I 
> believe that Linux still has a ways to go to "catch up" in the 
> ease-of-use department.
> Don


More information about the Python-list mailing list