| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changesProposal: Moratorium on Python language changesPosted Oct 25, 2009 22:13 UTC (Sun) by SEJeff (subscriber, #51588)In reply to: Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes by nevyn Parent article: Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes
If you're feeling froggy, you can take a F9/F10 python and add this to the
patchlist at the end.
http://www.digitalprognosis.com/opensource/patches/python...
With a little mundging of %_prefix in the spec file, you can have python2.4
(Log in to post comments)
Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes Posted Oct 25, 2009 22:34 UTC (Sun) by SEJeff (subscriber, #51588) [Link]
Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes Posted Oct 26, 2009 4:20 UTC (Mon) by nevyn (subscriber, #33129) [Link]
There's an open BZ that the python maintainer is looking at, which is trying to put python3.x in Fedora along side python2.6 ... but I don't recommend that, for the same reasons I don't recommend 2.4 + 2.5 in RHEL-5. Doing it via. rpms is likely to cause you pain, I've written up the major bits of pain you'll hit:
http://illiterat.livejournal.com/7660.html
Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes Posted Oct 26, 2009 5:50 UTC (Mon) by SEJeff (subscriber, #51588) [Link]
Great blog post btw but I've had this in production (python2.4 and
python2.5) for almost a full year with no problems. We just have our applications explicitly request python2.4 or python2.5 in the shebang. We also did something similar for another application using the alternatives system with %ifarch magic and %preun/%post scripts in the spec. It is doable. Even managing /usr/bin/python using alternatives is *doable* if you decide it is the right thing for your use case.
However for general purpose distro with finite resources I agree with you
Redhat not making python > 2.4 available in RHEL has caused some
|
|
||||||||||||