Greg Ward wrote: > On 26 May 2000, Gordon McMillan said: > > Yeah. I tend to install stuff outside the sys.prefix tree and > > then use .pth files. I realize I'm, um, unique in this regard > > but I lost everything in some upgrade gone bad. (When a Windows > > de- install goes wrong, your only option is to do some manual > > directory and registry pruning.) > > I think that's appropriate for Python "applications" -- in fact, > now that Distutils can install scripts and miscellaneous data, > about the only thing needed to properly support "applications" is > an easy way for developers to say, "Please give me my own > directory and create a .pth file". Hmm. I see an application as a module distribution that happens to have a script. (Or maybe I see a module distribution as a scriptless app ;-)). At any rate, I don't see the need to dignify <prefix>/share and friends with an official position. > (Actually, the .pth file > should only be one way to install an application: you might not > want your app's Python library to muck up everybody else's Python > path. An idea AMK and I cooked up yesterday would be an addition > to the Distutils "build_scripts" command: along with frobbing the > #! line to point to the right Python interpreter, add a second > line: > import sys ; sys.append(path-to-this-app's-python-lib) > > Or maybe "sys.insert(0, ...)". $PYTHONSTARTUP ?? Never really had to deal with this. On my RH box, /usr/bin/python is my build. At a client site which had 1.4 installed, I built 1.5 into $HOME/bin with a hacked getpath.c. > I'm more concerned with the what the Distutils works best with > now, though: module distributions. I think you guys have > convinced me; static data should normally sit with the code. I > think I'll make that the default (instead of prefix + "share"), > but give developers a way to override it. So eg.: > > data_files = ["this.dat", "that.cfg"] > > will put the files in the same place as the code (which could be > a bit tricky to figure out, what with the vagaries of > package-ization and "extra" install dirs); That's an artifact of your code ;-). If you figured it out once, you stand at least a 50% chance of getting the same answer a second time <.5 wink>. - Gordon
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4