On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 2:45 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 22. 07. 21 22:33, Troy Dawson wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:50 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> On 22. 07. 21 21:47, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > On 22. 07. 21 21:25, Troy Dawson wrote:
> >> I've been bitten by this yet again. A package needing /usr/bin/python and
> >> not python2 or python3. And it's way down in the code so it's hard to
> >> patch. But, it works fine on Fedora.
> >>
> >> Is anyone in the middle of porting python-unversioned-command over to
> epel8?
> >> If not, does anyone object to me porting it over?
> >
> > I wonder how would that package work?
> >
> > /usr/bin/python is co-owned by several RHEL-proper packages and managed by
> > alternatives.
>
> I hit "Send" to early, apologies, here is the rest of my email:
>
> Could you please share the package spec file with us (Python Maint team at Red
> Hat, specifically Tomas Orsava and me) before you actually push it to EPEL, so
> we get a chance to review it (and maybe test it)?
>
>
> On RHEL 8, if there is something that provides /usr/bin/python I can't find it,
> nor can dnf.
> I've been running RHEL 8 since 8.0, I'm currently at 8.4 and this is what I have.
>
> # dnf provides '/usr/bin/python'
> Error: No Matches found
> # ls /usr/bin/python
> ls: cannot access '/usr/bin/python': No such file or directory
> # which python
> /usr/bin/which: no python in
> (/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/root/bin)
>
> On Fedora, it's rather simple, just look at the contents of
> python-unversioned-command
> Two files, no scripts or triggers.
>
> # rpm -ql python-unversioned-command
> /usr/bin/python
> /usr/share/man/man1/python.1.gz
> # ls -lh /usr/bin/python
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 9 May 18 03:48 /usr/bin/python -> ./python3
> # ls -lh /usr/share/man/man1/python.1.gz
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 14 May 18 03:48 /usr/share/man/man1/python.1.gz ->
> ./python3.1.gz
>
> It looks like it will be very simple spec file.
> I'll probably just cut it out of the Fedora python spec file.
On Fedora, it is simple.
On RHEL 8, it is the opposite of simple.
The /usr/bin/python file is managed by alternatives but it deliberately not
owned by any Python package, so `yum install /usr/bin/python` does not work.
If the /usr/bin/python file is created/changed by the admin (or by a package
copied from Fedora), upon (re)installation or upgrade of python2 or
pytohn3{6,8,9} it will be restored based on the alternatives database.
See the %post sctriplets of the mentioned packages.
Ugg ... no wonder nobody has done this yet.
But, is that working right. It looks like it should be making a /usr/bin/python pointing to unversioned-python but I don't have any of that.
I'm not an Alternatives expert.
I guess what I'm really asking is if this is a bug or not?
I don't have a /usr/bin/python
I do have a /usr/bin/unversioned-python
But, what good is that, nothing calls "unversioned-python"
Should I open a bug on this? Or continue with my plan of making a fix via a package?
Troy
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
