[Pythonmac-SIG] Questions about various bits of Intel status

Andrew Barnert abarnert at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 24 00:17:02 CET 2006


Andrew Barnert:
> > What are the actual problems with having a
root/wheel
> > 755 framework directory instead of root/admin 775?
I
> > guess it means you can't install modules to
> > site-packages out of .pkg files? If it's
important, it
> > would be nice if it were easier to do properly.

Ronald Oussoren:
> root/admin 775 makes it easier to install packages
when
> you're an admin user, you can do away with the call
to
> sudo.

Yeah, but adding sudo at the command line isn't that
big a deal. 

I was assuming there were more serious problems, like
installing from a .pkg file (you can't launch the
installer as root nearly as easily as you can sudo
python or make). And maybe others that I didn't
anticipate. Or maybe not.

Also, Apple clearly intends things in /Library to be
admin 775, so why violate that unless there's a good
reason?

If it's not that hard to change make frameworkinstall
to do the right thing, why not do it? 

If it'd be easier to understand a patch rather than an
explanation, just let me know.

If you understand what I'm getting at and I'm just
being stupid (which is quite possible), please tell me
what I'm missing.

[re: darwinports and frameworkinstall]
> > I'm guessing it would help the darwinports and
fink
> > guys out, too. Last I checked, fink wouldn't build
> > Python at all on Intel, and darwinports wouldn't
do a
> > framework install--but even on PPC, they both
ended up
> > with a root/wheel 755 framework directory.
> 
> I don't use fink, and use darwinports only for
unix-y tools,
> IMHO neither should have to use framework installs
:-)

OK, my writing was a bit unclear. The "Last I checked"
part was a parenthetical aside; the "root/wheel 755"
part was the main issue.

If the only problems with wheel 755 are with .pkg
files (which you're probably not going to use with
darwinports or fink) and needing sudo (which doesn't
matter, since you always sudo port install), I guess
that's no problem. But it would still be fixed
automatically if make frameworkinstall were changed.

As for the side issue with framework builds:

If darwinports is going to include a python2.4 that
installs Idle.app, and ports like py-appscript, it
needs to either build a framework or find some other
way to get a working pythonw. Otherwise you get an
Idle that won't run, an appscript that can't be used,
etc.

You could argue that darwinports shouldn't have these
ports at all, I guess. But if they have them, the
ports should work.

BTW, darwinports is actually pretty useful for Mac-y
tools as well as unix-y tools. When I first got my
Intel iMac, I was able to install Bwana-Dik, Smultron,
CocoaDialog, etc. in a few minutes, even though none
of them had an official Intel or universal build. No
different from svk, pngcrush, links, and other unix-y
ports.

[re: tests]
> According to buildbot
> (www.python.org/dev/buildbot/trunk)
> the trunk shouldn't have any test failures.

As I said, none of these failures happened on a linux
box, or a PPC Mac, so I assume it's something (or some
things) specific to Intel Macs. Since buildbot doesn't
have an Intel Mac, I wouldn't expect it to find them.

So, should I file bugs?



More information about the Pythonmac-SIG mailing list