On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 13:33 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python > > %{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from > distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib()")} > > %{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c "from > distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib(1)")} > > > These no longer work with Python 3 due to "print" changes. They should be > replaced with something like these that work with both Python 2 and 3 (already > done in spectemplate-python.spec in rpmdevtools git): > > %{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from > distutils.sysconfig import *; import sys; > sys.stdout.write(get_python_lib())")} > > %{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c "from > distutils.sysconfig import *; import sys; > sys.stdout.write(get_python_lib(1))")} At first glance, yes, the change you suggest does generalize those fragments of python code so they work with both python 2 and python 3 (it removes the trailing newline implicitly generated by "print", but AIUI that's getting discarded in the macro handling) However, I think it's going to be a long time until it's sane to make %{__python} be python 3 rather than python 2. I'm hoping we will have parallel-installable python 2 and python 3 stacks [1], with separate packages, probably separate srpms, so perhaps we need alternative formulations where we define python3_sitelib and python3_sitearch? Not sure yet. Your proposed change does ease migration, so a cautious "+1" from me. Dave [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Python3F13 -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
