This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Using Py_SetPythonHome
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>, Meador Inge <meadori at codesourcery dot com>, gdb at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 17:12:44 +0200
- Subject: Re: Using Py_SetPythonHome
- References: <50511945.2070400@codesourcery.com> <20120917170657.GB5716@adacore.com> <20120917174611.GA27891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <CADPb22R4cTRqHyRi6asd6muJooPFPaCaRi2DDuqEtA+ew9jrRQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120919080410.GA12296@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120921153645.GD5439@adacore.com> <20120921154345.GA30615@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120921155758.GE5439@adacore.com> <20120921172735.GA4341@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121002130854.GL30746@adacore.com>
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:08:54 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> And to me, this is not violating "standard system
> packagainng practices" (please point me to a document that would claim
> to explain what the standard practices are),
I follow
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath
which is sure Fedora specific but in this part it can be considered as
a general GNU/Linux behavior, I am willing to discuss packaging guidelines of
other distros.
> but providing a very
> important feature, which, if not standard, definitely should be (IMO).
I really do not say anything whether this feature should be standard or not.
Maybe it should be standard, indeed. That is completely offtopic here.
Show me any common GNU/Linux distro with >= 1% of packages using this feature.
There is not any. Which proves to me it is not a standard feature.
If it should be a standard feature:
* These relocation functions should be moved as a GNU extension to glibc.
* GNU Coding Standards should be extended for it.
* etc.
I do not see any attempt to do this part, which is what I find inappropriate
on this feature.
> If I have built a tool somewhere with a given prefix, and then I want
> to install a copy somewhere else, it would be a real pain in the neck
> to have to rebuild it.
There already exist various methods to deal with it, a standardized one is
/usr/sbin/alternatives (chkconfig package) which requires no specific upstream
support from a package. Then there are per-package hacks like ENV variables
documented in a man page but they are still more clear than this surprising
relocation.
> Going back to the actual subject of this discussion, would it cause
> a problem to call Py_SetPythonHome in your situation where everything
> is static and installed at the default location?
Yes, it is a problem because 99.9% of other Python-using packages behave
differently.
Thanks,
Jan