[Slackbuilds-users] [FYI]SlackBuild for python modules should be architecture dependent

[Dragon Wisard]

I think what Eric was saying is that the Slackbuild is architecture
independent but the package generated by it is architecture dependent. That
seems to be enough to satisfy him.

Personally, I see no reason why the package should *need* to be architecture
dependent. We're restricting it based on a directory structure convention.
It would be relatively easy to just use symlinks to have the modules show up
in both places if appropriate. I see no reason to have two separate packages
when the contents are identical and the only difference is where they get
installed. It's a waste of space and adds unnecessary complexity to
administration.

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Grissiom <chaos.proton at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 02:36, Eric Hameleers <alien at slackbuilds.org>wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Grissiom
>>
>> If you write a SlackBuild that installs purepython files which are
>> architecture independent you will indeed still have a "lib vs lib64"
>> difference in the final package depending on the architecture you
>> create the package on.
>> But since we are SlackBuilds.org and not LinuxPackages.net we do not
>> have to worry about where the final package gets built and installed -
>> the person who compiles it will know.
>>
>
> Hmm, Ok, so I know the role of SlackBuilds.org -- distribute the build
> script but not the packages and there is no guarantee that the packages
> build from the scripts are re-distributable?
>
>
>>
>> So, the purepython package can be "noarch" as long as you determine
>> the install-lib using Python itself:
>>
>> PYTHONLIB=$( python -c "from distutils.sysconfig import
>> get_python_lib; print get_python_lib()" )
>>
>> This will yield "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages" on Slackware 12.2
>> and "/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages" on slackware64-current. You
>> see that the python version number no longer needs to be hardcoded.
>>
>> Use that variable as follows:
>>
>> python setup.py install \
>>  --prefix=/usr \
>>   --install-lib=$PYTHONLIB \
>>  --root=$PKG
>>
>
> The setup.py will take care of this automaticially. Maybe there is no need
> to bother --install-lib if you do not want to re-distribute the package.
>
> You will not have to add the "if ARCH ... fi" block and the
>> LIBDIRSUFFIX is not used at all. A single SlackBuild will work on all
>> Slackware releases.
>
>
> Yes, SlackBuilds will always work. So the problem now is the package build
> from a SlackBuild is re-distributable or not or, do we want it to be
> re-distributable?
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Grissiom
>
> _______________________________________________
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
> Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
>
>
>


-- 
http://www.dragonwisard.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/attachments/20090528/d4dd8190/attachment.htm>