The way to fix ports/104560

Vasil Dimov vd at
Tue Jan 23 12:10:37 UTC 2007

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 03:31:29 -0800, Alexander Botero-Lowry wrote:
> > > Please take a look at ports/104560 (and also ports/105853 and
> > > ports/106120) and come to a consensus what is the right way to fix this
> > > issue.
> > > 
> > > I am sure we can come to an agreement and shortly commit a fix.
> > 
> > As I see it:
> > 
> > - lang/python metaport must be removed
> > - all lang/python2? ports will install $PREFIX/bin/python binary
> > 
> > How that sounds?
> > 
> > Or if people absolutely need to have several different pythons on a
> > system, make the bin/python automatical symlink, like in perl ports.
> This fails to deal with installing the site-packages in the appropriate
> site-package directories. The same site-package directory can't be used
> because the pyc and pyo format changes between python implementations,
> so python needs to be able to generate the appropriate wants per python
> installation.
> For ports that use USE_PYDISTUTILS (which is the most common way to install
> a python package) ${PYTHON} is used, so I don't see why other ports shouldn't
> follow the convention.
> I do _agree_ that something should always be installed as python,

I think, this is the only issue about ports/104560
("x11-toolkits/py-gtk2 does not configure with python2.5").

So we have come to a consensus, right?
(bin/python should be installed by lang/python25)

> without
> version, but that doesn't mean that ports should just assume python when
> installing. They should use ${PYTHON} to be safe, and to make sure things
> are installed where the user wants them to be installed.

Vasil Dimov
gro.DSBeerF at dv
Two men look out through the same bars; one sees mud, and one the stars.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 155 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the freebsd-gnome mailing list