On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:23:04AM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 10:09, Konstantin Riabitsev wrote: > > Hello: > > > > Python programs shouldn't really be .noarch, as compiled python bytecode > > isn't exactly cross-platform. In case of yum this is particularly > > noticeable, as it doesn't ship .py files, only .pyc. When installed on, > > say, linux ppc, yum RPMs provided on the download site reportedly don't > > work because python cannot run .pyc files due to endianness issues. > > > > It's not endiannes last time I checked - it's python compiler version. > > I'm pretty sure noarch from the same python version will work on ppc, > too. > > We should include the .py's anyway. Agreed. It would often by handy to be able to look at the code, but it won't solve this problem. If ONLY .py files are distributed, it will work fine, and will be truly noarch. However, if you include .pyc files, it is THEY that will be run. The only value of the .py files in this case is so that users can look at them. -Michael P.S. just in case anyone gets any bright ideas, building .pyc files in %post has many many drawbacks - don't suggest this unless you've thought about file lists, checksums, provides, etc. -- Michael Stenner Office Phone: 919-660-2513 Duke University, Dept. of Physics mstenner@xxxxxxxxxxxx Box 90305, Durham N.C. 27708-0305
