Re: pkg_add vs python

2012-11-08 Thread Laurence Tratt
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:27:33PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > Actually, we discussed a possible approach. It looks reasonable to have a > "compile as package" mode (say through an env variable for instance) that > would disable the check and leave a mark in the compiled file that says the > check

Re: pkg_add vs python

2012-11-07 Thread Marc Espie
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:05:23AM +, Laurence Tratt wrote: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 02:15:53PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > > > Turns out python is stupid enough to store path+timestamp in its compiled > > *.pyc files to know when to recompile. > > The "auto-recompile everything which is out

Re: pkg_add vs python

2012-11-07 Thread Laurence Tratt
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 02:15:53PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > Turns out python is stupid enough to store path+timestamp in its compiled > *.pyc files to know when to recompile. The "auto-recompile everything which is out of date" feature is ingenious but there are at least two different ways of

pkg_add vs python

2012-11-05 Thread Marc Espie
sthen@ finally figured out most of the problem. Turns out python is stupid enough to store path+timestamp in its compiled *.pyc files to know when to recompile. Our package system doesn't look to closely at timestamps... so this explains how *.pyc files sometimes get rebuilt, and then throw erro