Python 2.5 incompatible with Fedora Core 6 - packaging problems again

Paul Boddie paul at
Sun Mar 4 23:26:42 CET 2007

MonkeeSage wrote:
> The configure script checks for libraries and headers that are
> required for a base build, and (according to the options passed to
> configure, or using the defaults) optional components. There is NO WAY
> for it to know which PACKAGES, on any of the 500 linux distributions,
> provide those libs and headers.

True, but it would be nice to be able to do a configure --with-some-
library[=path] and have it give an error if that library isn't found.
A lot of tests for specific libraries and headers exist in the
autoconf universe, and it's also possible to write custom tests. Of
course, this may be academic since distutils has apparently taken over
a lot of the work concerning optional modules.

> That is the job of the PACKAGER, or
> (gasp) the end user if you use a distro without a package system or
> trying to build from raw source. There is no passing the buck. If a
> package is broken, the packager must fix it. If the source is broken,
> the developer must fix it.

I guess if you're building from source, you're the packager, yes.
These days when I can't find up-to-date packages for my aging
distribution, I actually seek out such packages for newer
distributions and backport them, mostly because the dependencies have
been worked out by someone else. In such circumstances, I'm the
packager but I'm using a package infrastructure, as opposed to having
to do a lot of the hard work myself.


More information about the Python-list mailing list