On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 18:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > You need to decide on your use of the word module. You use it > interchangably for a patchon package and a single-file module. > > If you mean a "module" as in package, then you agree that the > statement was wrong, or not? > > If you mean a "module" as in a single file, then it doesn't make sense > to discuss about python and C code in one file embedded together. > > So the original statement used "module" while you meant the totality > of all modules and was wrong to advice to pull everything under > sitearch. If the statement was meaning a proper single file python > module it would be technically correct, but it would make no sense, as > there is no python/C mixing in the same file. You need to decide how to read my use of "module" I suppose. I said a 'python's module', eg something that you can do 'import foo' on in python. A module can be many individual FILES. Some compiled, some noncompiled. I did NOT use them interchangeable for a "patchon package" whatever that may be. And a 'single-file module' is still a python module, which is what I said. You've taken the base assumption that when I said 'python's module' I meant a python rpm package and ran with it, which is an incorrect assumption. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
