--- On Sat, 23/5/09, Jorge Morais <please.no.spam.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Jorge Morais <please.no.spam.h...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] ARGH I uninstalled python > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > Date: Saturday, 23 May, 2009, 8:55 AM > > Thank you! Thank you! Thank > you! > > > > I followed this > > > > http://blogs.pwmn.net/korkakak/2008/06/04/gentoo-i-unmerged-python-now-what > > > > which worked - in the end. couple of caveats tho for > anyone 'that follows' get python from their site as the ftp > link in this article is out of date. > > > > http://www.python.org/download/releases/ > > > > also I initially tried 3.01 and that didn't work so i > installed 2.6.2 which worked 'out of the box' i then tested > with 'emerge' and am now running 'emerge -va python' > > > > Cheers guys! > > > > Thanks to Dale too! > > Glad it worked. > But, I don't know what will happen when the properly > emerged python > overwrites the manually installed Python. > > Does anybody know if the manual python install is > "slotted", in the sense > that it installs files in /usr/lib/python2.6, > /usr/include/python2.6, etc? > If it isn't, and Portage installs a slotted Python, the old > files wouldn't > be overwritten. > And even if it is, the differences between the > differently-configured and > super-patched new python and the vanilla old python could > result in > a different set of file names, so it is possible that the > old python > will not be totally overwritten by the portage-emerged > python. > > If I were you, I would at the very least read the log > (specially its tail) > of the python emerge (emerge logs normally go to > /var/log/emerge). > And you did log the files installed by the manual python > install, > didn't you? > > And why did you try python 3.01 first? You should try a > similar vesion to > what you were previously running. And specifically python > 3.01 is crazy, > as it is widely known that it is *not* compatible with > python 2.x software. > And did you properly uninstall python 3.0.1? > > Also, I didn't like the instructions in this blog very > much. > Wouldn't it be more appropriate to configure python like > portage would? > For example, in my system, where the last python install > was > dev-lang/python-2.5.4-r2 USE="ncurses readline ssl > threads xml -berkdb -build -doc -examples -gdbm -ipv6 > -sqlite -tk -ucs2 -wininst" > > the configure line was (from the log) > ./configure --prefix=/usr --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu > --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info > --datadir=/usr/share --sysconfdir=/etc > --localstatedir=/var/lib --with-fpectl --enable-shared > --disable-ipv6 --infodir=${prefix}/share/info > --mandir=${prefix}/share/man --with-libc= > --enable-unicode=ucs4 --with-threads > --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > Maybe it would be nice to install python to > /usr/local (I'm not sure), > but if you are going to install it in /usr (like portage), > I think you > might as well use the same configure line portage would. > And if you wanted to be really clean, you could apply the > patches that > portage applies. > > And most importantly, > *was this necessary*? > Couldn't he have emerged python by invoking > ebuild > /usr/port/usr/portage/dev-lang/python/python-2.6.2.ebuild > merge > ? > This would do everyting correctly. > And wouldn't it work without Python, since it is written in > Bash? > AFAIK, what needs Python is the high level interface to the > portage > system, while the low-level interface only needs Bash (but > I'm > totally not sure). > > And finally, couldn't he have gotten a binary package from > http://tinderbox.dev.gentoo.org/default-linux/x86/dev-lang/ > ? > > Also that emerge borked ebuild too. ----------------------- N: Jon Hardcastle E: j...@ehardcastle.com 'Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own.' Please sponsor me for the London to Brighton 2009. Just Giving: http://www.justgiving.com/jonathanhardcastle -----------------------
