Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Using Optware Python packages with Python 2.5

Expand Messages
  • ptnemot
    I have recently started using Python 2.5 on my WL500g box instead of Python 2.4 (for reasons I won t detail out here). Now python itself works fine, the
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 7, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I have recently started using Python 2.5 on my WL500g box instead of
      Python 2.4 (for reasons I won't detail out here). Now python itself
      works fine, the Optware packages for Python packages are however
      based on Python 2.4 and therefore will not correctly work with Python
      2.5 (e.g. the path to site-packages is not correct). The packages I
      am using specifically are py-cheetah and py-cherrypy, but I assume
      the same is valid for other packages also.

      Now I still have gotten the packages to work by downloading the
      source and issuing "setup.py install" on my router itself, however I
      would prefer to install these packages through the standard Optware
      package feed. So my question is how could we get these packages to
      work also with python 2.5 (while maintaining compatibility with v2.4)?

      One though would be to adjust the current .mk files to ensure the
      correct paths are used, but I'm not sure how in the .mk file we could
      decide whether to use the 2.4/2.5/... paths. Another option would be
      to have different ipkg packages for the different versions (e.g. py25-
      cherrypy) but this off course isn't really a clean way of doing
      things.

      Any help would be appreciated!
    • Brian Zhou
      Good question. I ve been thinking about this for a while and don t have a good answer. The problem is that during build time, we don t know whether python24 or
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 7, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Good question. I've been thinking about this for a while and don't
        have a good answer.

        The problem is that during build time, we don't know whether python24
        or python25 is going to be used. We know at the most which python is
        currently the default.

        So for any py-<foo> package, we either build for both versions and
        package it in a single py-<foo>, or have a separate py24-<foo> and
        py25-<foo>. The latter is how debian does it.

        I don't know which way people prefer: fat py-<foo> or double the
        number of python packages? From developer's point of view, double the
        number of python packages is easier.

        -Brian

        --- In nslu2-general@yahoogroups.com, "ptnemot" <groups@...> wrote:
        >
        > I have recently started using Python 2.5 on my WL500g box instead of
        > Python 2.4 (for reasons I won't detail out here). Now python itself
        > works fine, the Optware packages for Python packages are however
        > based on Python 2.4 and therefore will not correctly work with Python
        > 2.5 (e.g. the path to site-packages is not correct). The packages I
        > am using specifically are py-cheetah and py-cherrypy, but I assume
        > the same is valid for other packages also.
        >
        > Now I still have gotten the packages to work by downloading the
        > source and issuing "setup.py install" on my router itself, however I
        > would prefer to install these packages through the standard Optware
        > package feed. So my question is how could we get these packages to
        > work also with python 2.5 (while maintaining compatibility with v2.4)?
        >
        > One though would be to adjust the current .mk files to ensure the
        > correct paths are used, but I'm not sure how in the .mk file we could
        > decide whether to use the 2.4/2.5/... paths. Another option would be
        > to have different ipkg packages for the different versions (e.g. py25-
        > cherrypy) but this off course isn't really a clean way of doing
        > things.
        >
        > Any help would be appreciated!
        >
      • ptnemot
        Taking into account the fact that having seperate packages is easier, that it s also the way Debian does it and that it allows an easier dependency management
        Message 3 of 3 , Nov 7, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Taking into account the fact that having seperate packages is
          easier, that it's also the way Debian does it and that it allows an
          easier dependency management (py24-<foo> is dependent on python24,
          py25-<foo> is dependent on python25) I would suggest to go this
          route. Having to build for both versions in one package is not
          really clean either so if there is no clean solution we might as
          well take the easy one...

          Kind regards,

          Peter.

          --- In nslu2-general@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Zhou" <b88zhou@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Good question. I've been thinking about this for a while and don't
          > have a good answer.
          >
          > The problem is that during build time, we don't know whether
          python24
          > or python25 is going to be used. We know at the most which python
          is
          > currently the default.
          >
          > So for any py-<foo> package, we either build for both versions and
          > package it in a single py-<foo>, or have a separate py24-<foo> and
          > py25-<foo>. The latter is how debian does it.
          >
          > I don't know which way people prefer: fat py-<foo> or double the
          > number of python packages? From developer's point of view, double
          the
          > number of python packages is easier.
          >
          > -Brian
          >
          > --- In nslu2-general@yahoogroups.com, "ptnemot" <groups@> wrote:
          > >
          > > I have recently started using Python 2.5 on my WL500g box
          instead of
          > > Python 2.4 (for reasons I won't detail out here). Now python
          itself
          > > works fine, the Optware packages for Python packages are however
          > > based on Python 2.4 and therefore will not correctly work with
          Python
          > > 2.5 (e.g. the path to site-packages is not correct). The
          packages I
          > > am using specifically are py-cheetah and py-cherrypy, but I
          assume
          > > the same is valid for other packages also.
          > >
          > > Now I still have gotten the packages to work by downloading the
          > > source and issuing "setup.py install" on my router itself,
          however I
          > > would prefer to install these packages through the standard
          Optware
          > > package feed. So my question is how could we get these packages
          to
          > > work also with python 2.5 (while maintaining compatibility with
          v2.4)?
          > >
          > > One though would be to adjust the current .mk files to ensure
          the
          > > correct paths are used, but I'm not sure how in the .mk file we
          could
          > > decide whether to use the 2.4/2.5/... paths. Another option
          would be
          > > to have different ipkg packages for the different versions (e.g.
          py25-
          > > cherrypy) but this off course isn't really a clean way of doing
          > > things.
          > >
          > > Any help would be appreciated!
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.