Hello, On Nov 15 14:25 Dirk Mueller wrote (shortened): > On Thursday 15 November 2007, Johannes Meixner wrote: > > > Think about the "worst case" when the user replaces our Pyhon > > with whatever self-compiled Pyhon. > > > > Are byte-compiled Python .pyc and .pyo files the same for any Python > > and/or is any Python sufficiently smart to know when .pyc and/or .pyo > > files are outdated (even if the matching .py files are unchanged)? > > they`re installed in a versioned directory.
Does this mean that .pyc and .pyo files can be different for different Python versions? Python .pyc and .pyo files are not necessarily installed in a versioned directory like /usr/lib/python2.5/. They are installed where the matching .py file is. On a openSUSE 10.3 i386 default system I find .py files in /usr/share/emacs/22.1/etc/ /usr/share/hplip/* /usr/share/texmf/doc/generic/enctex/ /usr/lib/gimp/2.0/* /usr/lib/ooo-2.0/* /usr/bin/ What happens if Python version N creates /somewhere/file.pyc and later there is an update to Python version M? Is Python version M sufficiently smart to know that /somewhere/file.pyc is probably outdated? > > I wonder why in this case small RPMs seem not to count. > > So far printing with more than 100MB of data is the bigger factor > compared to a couple of mb we could save by not packaging pyc files. I do not understand this logic. I would understand if you said that packaging pyc files doesn't matter regarding RPM package size but I wonder why you suddenly start talking about printing? What do you want to tell reagrding printing, Python, and RPM package size? Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany AG Nuernberg, HRB 16746, GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
