On Sunday 04 December 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> Hi Adam, thanks for the report.
>
> On Monday 28 November 2011, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/ has several broken links, all
> > pointing to sources.redhat.com.
> >
> > It seems that related issues were flagged b
Reading python.m4, I notice that it claims to support only Python >=
2.0, yet still has specific support for Python 1.5. Would a patch
along the following lines therefore be accepted? (If so I'll write the
changelog entry &c.!)
>From 159eee8f676f41aa4619d074e2bb8a01d102e4a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
200
The code currently used to get the python package directory is wrong
for Python 3:
>>> from distutils import sysconfig; print
>>> (sysconfig.get_python_lib(0,0,'/usr/local'))/usr/local/lib/python3/dist-packages
is wrong (should be /usr/local/lib/python3.2/dist-packages). Now, in
some sense this mu
Reuben Thomas wrote:
The code currently used to get the python package directory is wrong
for Python 3:
from distutils import sysconfig; print
(sysconfig.get_python_lib(0,0,'/usr/local'))/usr/local/lib/python3/dist-packages
is wrong (should be /usr/local/lib/python3.2/dist-packag
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> On Sunday 04 December 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Hi Adam, thanks for the report.
>>
>> On Monday 28 November 2011, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> > http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/ has several broken links, all
>> > pointing to sources.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> Reading python.m4, I notice that it claims to support only Python >=
> 2.0, yet still has specific support for Python 1.5. Would a patch
> along the following lines therefore be accepted? (If so I'll write the
> changelog entry &c.!)
The patc
