On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 06:23:25PM +0000, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > However, that won't prevent you from having other errors/warnings
> > like this: sh: /usr/bin/python3: No such file or directory
>
> You could get rid of those by using:
>
> %{!?py3ver: %global py3ver %(%{?__python3} -c 'import sys;
> print(sys.version[0:3])' 2>/dev/null)}
>
> And sometimes you might even prefer:
>
> %{!?py3ver: %global py3ver %(%{?__python3} -c 'import sys;
> print(sys.version[0:3])' 2>/dev/null || echo 3.0)}
>
> That would give a result that "looked right" in the absence of python3,
> giving other bits of the spec that depend on that definition a better
> chance of working as expected.
>
> > Without python3 installed, macros in the spec file can't be expanded
> > correctly (because their definitions depend on python3). The spec
> > file is BuildRequireing python3 so it shouldn't be expected that you
> > can operate on the spec file without python3 installed.
>
> I'd prefer to see specs a bit more robust so that for instance you
> could run "spectool" on them to download upstream sources and then do a
> mockbuild, which wouldn't require python3 or whatever to be installed
> on the build host.
>
I tested this with spectool -g and python-psycopg2 and all variants of that
py3ver line work.(without even a warning). So spectool isn't really an
issue.
-Toshio
Attachment:
pgpQuAqR4pa3f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
