On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:30:40PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 09:40:04AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 12:44:36PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > > > I'm confused why Fedora Python packages get installed in > > > /usr/lib/python*/site-packages/. > > > > > > Looking at the upstream Python documentation[1] it seems this > > > directory is reserved for packages installed by the local system > > > administrator. (Similar to the Perl distinction between > > > INSTALLDIRS=vendor / INSTALLDIRS=site / INSTALLDIRS=core [2]) > > > > > I don't see where the distinction is being made between local system admin > > and vendor in that document. Could you give a better link or a search term? > > Maybe I can explain the Perl situation better. > > "site" (on Fedora this is /usr/local/share/perl5) is where the system > admin installs packages using: > > perl Makefile.PL ; make ; sudo make install > > "vendor" (/usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl from Rawhide onwards) is where > the package manager puts Perl packages which aren't in the core Perl. > > "core" (/usr/share/perl5) is where core parts of Perl go and packages > which are shipped in the perl tarball. > > The idea AIUI is that admin-installed packages survive Perl upgrades > or cases where Perl is removed and reinstalled. If you use the 'cpan' > command line tool on Fedora, the packages get installed in "site". > Oops -- I shouldn't have quoted the perl stuff in that -- My question was targetted at the upstream python documentation. I'll talk a little more about the perl comparison at the bottom. > > Also, on an FHS compliant Linux system, the system administrator would not > > use /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages anyway. They'd use something like > > /usr/local/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages. > > Indeed, and Debian puts site-packages under /usr/local as you've > described, which is where I came across the problem in the first place > (trying to build a package for Debian and noticing this is different > from Fedora). > > Debian also creates /usr/share/pyshared but I've yet to understand > exactly why. > I'd have to look and check if this is the same thing I'm thinking of but Debian regularly ships multiple versions of the python interpreter. As part of that, they ship the *.py files in /usr/share/pyshared. Then they have a scriptlet that runs at install time to symlink those into all the /usr/lib/pythonX.Y that are installed and byte compile them. > [...] > > > In this setup, it seems like Debian is not putting anything in > > site-packages. Without more information, their use of dist-packages just > > seems arbitrary and non-standard. > > I think the Perl case makes some sense, if one accepts that there is a > difference between "core" and "vendor" (maybe this difference is too > artificial). Upstream Python documentation doesn't really cover the > case of package managers at all. > <nod> In python the vendor and core stuff is separated but the vendor stuff nests within the core directory. If you take a look at /usr/lib64/pythonX.Y you'll see a bunch of *.py files directly in there. Those are all "core". Many of the directories in there also contain "core" files. The directory /usr/lib64/pythonX.Y/site-packages is where vendor supplied third party stuff is stored. From a brief look we don't seem to have configured a default directory for system admins to use in /usr/local/ but that seems like a good addition to me. Open a bug for dmalcolm to look at for that. (And yes, upstream python, like many upstreams that don't target Linux primarily, doesn't think of the FHS and just assumesthe sysadmin installs to /usr/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages.) -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpf_1l39ufT_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
