Brendan Long wrote:
>
> References:
> http://docs.python.org/library/2to3.html
> http://diveintopython3.org/porting-code-to-python-3-with-2to3.html
Another reference
for things to consider when choosing Python2 or Python3 ...
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python2orPython3
Fair enough, thanks for the input.
--
Samuel Baldwin - logik.li
Am Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:41:01 -0600
schrieb Dan McGee :
> Five step plan to success:
> 1) Actually contribute instead of whining on a mailing list
Is saying one's opinion whining? How long since? And, yes, I am already
contributing in AUR, I've already written a split PKGBUILD for
libreoffice-i18n
Am Thu, 18 Nov 2010 02:01:11 +0800
schrieb Ng Oon-Ee :
> And Gan Lu, I'm not sure which thread you've been following, but Heiko
> specifically references something along the lines of "I may as well go
> back to Gentoo".
Have you really read only this half sentence? Or have you read all my
argumen
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Alper KANAT wrote:
>
> That's nonsense.
what is? py3k is nothing more than the completion and/or significant
advancement of several items that began in the 2.x tree; this is not
new information.
> It's correct that Arch is an advanced user distribution but
> yo
On 11/17/2010 02:18 PM, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Samuel Baldwin
wrote:
Same error. I'm not updated to the point where python3 is the default
anyways. `python' still runs 2.6.5.
We don't support partial upgrades. You should never use -Sy if not
followed by -Su
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Samuel Baldwin
wrote:
> Same error. I'm not updated to the point where python3 is the default
> anyways. `python' still runs 2.6.5.
We don't support partial upgrades. You should never use -Sy if not
followed by -Su (or combined, -Syu).
Now, go ahead and do a full
Same error. I'm not updated to the point where python3 is the default
anyways. `python' still runs 2.6.5.
--
Samuel Baldwin - logik.li
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 14:02 -0500, Samuel Baldwin wrote:
> Also, when I run `python3' and type 'import wicd' I still get the same
> error, so I'm sceptical of explaining it away as merely python3,
> unless I'm missing something.
Try it with `python2'. `wicd' expects python2, and `python' now calls
Also, when I run `python3' and type 'import wicd' I still get the same
error, so I'm sceptical of explaining it away as merely python3,
unless I'm missing something.
--
Samuel Baldwin - logik.li
2010/11/17 John K Pate :
> Did you "pacman -Sy" or "pacman -Syu"? Probably has to do with the move
> to python3.
Just `pacman -Sy', X seems to break when I update it and I'm down to
one machine at the moment, haven't wanted to break the laptop for a
day to figure out what's going on. Last time I j
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 13:50 -0500, Samuel Baldwin wrote:
> After a fresh install of wicd (I pacman -Sy'd yesterday), it won't
> seem to start; not really sure what to do here.
Did you "pacman -Sy" or "pacman -Syu"? Probably has to do with the move
to python3.
John
==
John K Pate
Student, PhD In
That's nonsense. It's correct that Arch is an advanced user distribution but
you can't expect everyone to workaround each py application. Not everyone
that use Arch are developers.
---
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
2010/11/12 C Anthony Risinger
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Auguste Pop
After a fresh install of wicd (I pacman -Sy'd yesterday), it won't
seem to start; not really sure what to do here.
arrakis^samuel# wicd
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/share/wicd/daemon/wicd-daemon.py", line 56, in
from wicd import wpath
ImportError: No module named wicd
arra
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 16:47 +0100, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 November 2010 16:37:41 甘露(Gan Lu) wrote:
> > If some says "this is shame", "I'm leaving",
> > "you suck", "developers are selfish", you could certainly discard
> > them, but not I or Heiko, we just talk about our opinion.
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:46:54 +0100
Thorsten Töpper wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:41:59 +1000
> Allan McRae wrote:
> > On 17/11/10 16:43, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:40:27 +0100, Pierre Schmitz
> > > wrote:
> > >> Side note: make test does no longer pass with this versio
On Wednesday 17 November 2010 16:37:41 甘露(Gan Lu) wrote:
> If some says "this is shame", "I'm leaving",
> "you suck", "developers are selfish", you could certainly discard
> them, but not I or Heiko, we just talk about our opinion.
> Does a great community contain only TU/devs? Does Arch is drive
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:31 AM, 甘露(Gan Lu) wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
>>> I know I'm crossposting this, but this rather belongs to arch-general
>>> than to aur-general.
>>>
>>> Am Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:19:40 -0
On 11/17/2010 08:02 PM, csgeek wrote:
not that I mind solving a nit picky c++ puzzle and tracking down a code
bugbut.. isn't this completely off base/topic for
this list?
--
@csgeek
I don't think so, as per the problem, I follow ANSI C++ and g++ won't
compile the thing. I thought this wa
not that I mind solving a nit picky c++ puzzle and tracking down a code
bugbut.. isn't this completely off base/topic for
this list?
--
@csgeek
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Magnus Therning wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 16:10, Nilesh Govindarajan
> wrote:
> > On 11/16/2010 08:54
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:31 AM, 甘露(Gan Lu) wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
>> I know I'm crossposting this, but this rather belongs to arch-general
>> than to aur-general.
>>
>> Am Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:19:40 -0500
>> schrieb Kaiting Chen :
>>
>>> I think it's kind of
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> I know I'm crossposting this, but this rather belongs to arch-general
> than to aur-general.
>
> Am Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:19:40 -0500
> schrieb Kaiting Chen :
>
>> I think it's kind of hard for me to see why I should maintain a
>> package that's
I know I'm crossposting this, but this rather belongs to arch-general
than to aur-general.
Am Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:19:40 -0500
schrieb Kaiting Chen :
> I think it's kind of hard for me to see why I should maintain a
> package that's already been discarded by its developer. In my opinion
> such pac
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:41:59 +1000
Allan McRae wrote:
> On 17/11/10 16:43, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:40:27 +0100, Pierre Schmitz
> > wrote:
> >> Side note: make test does no longer pass with this version. It
> >> might be just the test itself that is broken though (tested
24 matches
Mail list logo
