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

Re: Using Optware Python packages with Python 2.5

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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.