On Thursday 11 August 2005 10:29, Orion Poplawski wrote: > I'm a python neophyte, but I've been packaging some python packages > and have questions about .pyo files. I've gotten various feedback > about including them, not including them, and using %ghost on them. > Can someone please explain what the issues are (both with arch and > noarch packages)? Also, what does %ghost do? Arch/Noarch, it's the same. The issues have to do with whether they provide the bang vs. buck (buck being diskspace in this case) that you'd want. I think fedora-extras in general goes with the %ghost method because it was deemed that they don't. %ghost deletes those files upon package removal. The reason you want %ghost is because if you run a python script that starts with: #!/usr/bin/python -O or # python -O /usr/share/script/main.py Then .pyo files will automatically litter your harddrive. %ghost will clean these up. Currently, .pyo provides two optimizations: 1. (-O) some peephole bytecode optimization to improve startup. 2. (-OO) get rid of the docstrings to streamline the code. #2 could be bad in that some testing relies on docstrings. -OO is never really used in packages. #1 -- I heard that this may be just included without -O in a future release. I don't know. Depends on how pedantic the PowersThatBe want the bytecode to map against the code that's just been parsed/lexed. Anyway, hope that helps. Policy is to %ghost .pyo for add-on modules in extras, I believe. (Although baseline python will always have .pyo in the lib directory.) I for one, don't really care since were talking about saving kilobytes of diskspace... YMMV. -- -jeff -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
