[Zope3-dev] Makefile and python version number

[Julien Anguenot]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ok I just changed the version number to correct the problem.

I'll try to read the previous discussions you mentionned below.

Cheers,

	J.

Fred Drake wrote:
> On 8/29/05, Julien Anguenot <ja at nuxeo.com> wrote:
> 
>>http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/Makefile?rev=37919&r1=37889&r2=37919
>>
>>The reason is not explained within the logs ??
> 
> 
> That particular change was because I'd managed to add the version
> number back accidentally; it had previously been removed (I think by
> Stephan Richter).
> 
> 
>>The problem is when you have the following installed :
> 
> ...
> 
>>I think this changeset made the problem appear :
>>http://svn.zope.org/Zope3/trunk/Makefile?rev=38056&r1=37919&r2=38056
> 
> 
> I'm skeptical of that, though.
> 
> Regardless of the revision that caused the problem, the problem
> specifically is that there's more than one place where the Python
> executable is named.  Ideally, there should be only one place, but
> that doesn't work well with the sh-bang lines in Unix scripts.  :-(
> 
> The "right way" to spell the name of the Python executable has been
> discussed extensively at various times, and its not clear to me that
> we've ever reached a real conclusion.  There are actually two issues:
> 
> 1.  How should we spell the Python executable in a checkout?
> 
> 2.  How should we spell the Python executable in an installation?
> 
> The "ideal" way to do the later is likely platform specific (Windows
> v. Unix again; I don't know if Mac OS X really introduces a third
> variant or not).
> 
> The specific case you cite is checkout-specific, however, so platform
> is irrelevant; you get what's in the checkout.
> 
> The version number was initially added to the spelling of the Python
> executable to ensure that the right version was selected; this was
> done before Python 2.4 was available.  At this point, there are more
> acceptable versions (2.3.5 and 2.4.x), and it's even common for
> python2.3 not to be installed by default (which I suspect was why the
> Makefile was modified).  Python 2.3 certainly wasn't installed on my
> Ubuntu system until I added a local installation fairly recently.
> 
> What the right thing is needs to be considered again.  Changing the
> Makefile back to specify python2.3 is acceptable, I think, because we
> do still require compatibility with Python 2.3.5.  It's not ideal, but
> we're not likely to agree on what's ideal for a checkout anyway, even
> for Unix users.
> 
> 
>   -Fred
> 


- --
Julien Anguenot | Nuxeo R&D (Paris, France)
CPS Platform : http://www.cps-project.org
Zope3 / ECM   : http://www.z3lab.org
mail: anguenot at nuxeo.com; tel: +33 (0) 6 72 57 57 66
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDE0HRGhoG8MxZ/pIRAiAIAJ43qVeOGd6X/ilTHK9vWAbEGopIKACfZKQg
FCGURptgYtgWNQ3QqzGDGjU=
=IZW3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----