python3 is in rawhide and I'm hoping to build out the Python 3 stack
(help would be most welcome!)
I've run into a snag with the plan of building out parallel python 2 and
python 3 stacks [1]: What do we do about executables that live
in /usr/bin ?
For example if we have a 'console_scripts' in a setup.py shared between
python 2 and python 3 builds: these will spit out files in /usr/bin/,
and these will collide.
The immediate example I'm thinking of is python-coverage. This
package's setup.py has:
entry_points = {
'console_scripts': [
'coverage = coverage:main',
]
},
which thus generates a /usr/bin/coverage executable (this is a python
script that runs another python script whilst generating code-coverage
information on the latter). Where does the python3 version of this
executable go?
Similarly for the 'scripts' clause; see e.g. python-pygments:
Pygments-1.1.1/setup.py has:
scripts = ['pygmentize'],
which thus leads to a /usr/bin/pygmentize executable (it's a utility to
do syntax-highlighting, so not a language-support feature as such;
still, having both py2 and py3 versions available seems worthwhile for
transition purposes).
One approach is to simply add a "3" or "-3" suffix to these paths. I've
already done this for python3-tools; "2to3" became "2to3-3"
In the above examples, this would lead to:
/usr/bin/coverage-3
/usr/bin/pymentize-3
Or we could use a "python3-" prefix, leading to:
/usr/bin/python3-coverage
/usr/bin/python3-pymentize
Or something involving directories and the PATH environment variable,
leading perhaps to:
/usr/libexec/python-3.1/coverage
/usr/libexec/python-3.1/pygmentize
Anyone got any better ideas? Thoughts about which of the above is
preferrable?
Potentially we could automate the solution in python3-setuptools, so
that you don't need to fixup the build by hand in each setup.py.
Thoughts?
Dave
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Python3F13
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
