[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: cvs.fedora.redhat.com down



On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 09:50:29AM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 17:55 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> 
> > That is, if I've got the right idea about fixing up (some of the) python
> > x86_64 failures.  Am I correct in my assumption that the old
> >   %{_libdir}/python%{pyver}/site-packages/...  won't work with x86_64
> 
> That might work for arch-dependent Python extensions, and most likely
> not for arch-independent ones on x86_64.
> 
> > but the new style (as defined in fedora-spectemplates)
> >   %{python_sitelib} for arch independent and
> >   %{python_sitelib} for arch specific python files will?
> 
> The latter should obviously be %{python_sitearch}.  But yes, it should
> work.
> 
> Note that in the majority of cases, it's not a matter of individual
> _files_, but complete Python extension _packages_.
> 
> So, if a tarball you're creating contains *any* arch-dependent stuff,
> all of it, not only the arch-dependent bits, will probably land in %
> {python_sitearch} (ie. what distutils.sysconfig.get_python_lib(1)
> returns).
> 
Hmmm... thanks for pointing out the difference.  So I'll check at the
module level for whether the whole module is arch-dependent or not... and
stare suspiciously at the build scripts of any package providing both arch
dependent and arch independent modules.

-Toshio


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]