pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: python25 removed

On 10/6/2012 21:49, David Holland wrote:
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 08:46:33PM +0200, John Marino wrote:
  >  "It is still being used" needs clarification.

% ls -l /var/db/pkg/python25-2.5.6nb2/
total 308
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel      34 Feb 18  2012 +ALTERNATIVES
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel    7258 Feb 18  2012 +BUILD_INFO
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel    3309 Feb 18  2012 +BUILD_VERSION
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel      63 Feb 18  2012 +COMMENT
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  275000 Feb 18  2012 +CONTENTS
-r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel    4271 Feb 18  2012 +DEINSTALL
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel     734 Feb 18  2012 +DESC
-r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel    5033 Feb 18  2012 +INSTALL
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel     101 Jul 22 13:56 +REQUIRED_BY
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel      10 Feb 18  2012 +SIZE_ALL
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel       9 Feb 18  2012 +SIZE_PKG

Is that clearer?

No, that's just snarky.  Plus you showed python 2.5 to boot.

  >  I am
  >  pointedly questioning why we build py- packages with 2.6 when they
  >  present no benefit _AT ALL_ over building with 2.7.

Except for, you know, they work with Python 2.6, which some people are

Using python2.6 outside of pkgsrc doesn't affect the packages within pkgsrc. Python2.6 and Python2.7 can be installed concurrently, right? Pkgsrc only guarantees compatibility on a per-branch basis.

Also, as I previously said, the people that want to use the latest pkgsrc with a python 2.6 could still obtain them from source.

  >  I think we need to review the multiversion policy.

I don't see any reason to.

Obviously. To me the only explanation that makes sense is a desire to artificially inflate pkgsrc package numbers. I'm trying very hard give the benefit of the doubt that this isn't the reason, but otherwise I'm having a hard time understanding these clutter "policies" (word used loosely).

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index