From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19202 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2012 19:26:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 19194 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2012 19:26:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TBC X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from hop-nat-141.emc.com (HELO mexforward.lss.emc.com) (168.159.213.141) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 19:26:28 +0000 Received: from hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI02.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.55]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q93JQJQI023020 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:26:23 -0400 Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd03.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.145]) by hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:26:08 -0400 Received: from mxhub22.corp.emc.com (mxhub22.corp.emc.com [128.222.70.134]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q93JQ4hb024679; Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:26:07 -0400 Received: from mx37a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.253]) by mxhub22.corp.emc.com ([128.222.70.134]) with mapi; Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:26:06 -0400 From: "Terekhov, Mikhail" To: Jan Kratochvil CC: "gdb@sourceware.org" Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 19:26:00 -0000 Subject: RE: Using Py_SetPythonHome Message-ID: <393A4D071DD24B45A370BEBB86AD05A22163337B7D@MX37A.corp.emc.com> References: <20120917174611.GA27891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120919080410.GA12296@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120921153645.GD5439@adacore.com> <20120921154345.GA30615@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120921155758.GE5439@adacore.com> <20120921172735.GA4341@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121002130854.GL30746@adacore.com> <20121003151244.GA22734@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121003153854.GC13994@adacore.com> <20121003175343.GA14317@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20121003175343.GA14317@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-EMM-MHVC: 1 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-10/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 Hi Jan, You are living on another planet for sure. Regards, Mikhail P.S. The same note about "grain of salt" applies. > -----Original Message----- > From: gdb-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-owner@sourceware.org] On > Behalf Of Jan Kratochvil > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 1:54 PM > To: Joel Brobecker > Cc: Doug Evans; Meador Inge; gdb@sourceware.org > Subject: Re: Using Py_SetPythonHome >=20 > Hi Joel, >=20 > please take this mail "with a grain of salt", although only a bit. >=20 >=20 > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 17:38:54 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > that we should cater to the needs of people who do not provide > > a distribution, but just a binary package. >=20 > There are not any such people. >=20 >=20 > > You need to understand that there are uses of Free > > Software other than distribution-provided binaries. >=20 > It is already a history. >=20 >=20 > > I still build a lot of software from sources, >=20 > Binaries outside of package management no longer exists and they should be > deleted ASAP if found as it is both a security hole and a too expensive > software management issue. >=20 >=20 > > to start somewhere in my home directory. But then, the sysadmin asked > > me to move it elsewhere because it takes too much room. >=20 > There do not exist any multi-user systems anymore. Each developer has her > own > virtual machine (in fact many of them), therefore sure with root access a= nd > with proper normal automatic package management there. >=20 >=20 > > Should I have > > to recompile everything just because the world is now distro-centric? >=20 > Nobody is compiling software, this is happenning automatically in build > farms. >=20 >=20 > > Should every company out there that provides binary packages deal > > with the problem on their own rather than share the feature just because > > it isn't a necessary feature in distro-style binaries? >=20 > There is no problem, all files and their locations are under the control = of > package management of each GNU/Linux distro. >=20 >=20 > > Yes, it would be great if glibc dealt with it automatically for us. > > But what about Solaris, HP-UX, IRIX, Windows? Right now, there is > > no standard cross-platform way to deal with the problem. So each > > project is on its own. Not ideal, but still a fact that we have to > > deal with. >=20 > Please withstand those few remaining years on those proprietary systems > and do > not try to reinvent GNU/Linux package management on top of them, that > has been > tried already uncountable times and it does not work. These proprietary > systems are doomed, their missing package management is a part of this > fate. >=20 >=20 > > > > Going back to the actual subject of this discussion, would it cause > > > > a problem to call Py_SetPythonHome in your situation where > everything > > > > is static and installed at the default location? > > > > > > Yes, it is a problem because 99.9% of other Python-using packages > behave > > > differently. > > > > With this reasoning, would people ever inovate? >=20 > That is a great idea. Packaging rules changes get proposed and discussed > first at: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_Committee > Or sure an appropriate body in some other major GNU/Linux distro featuring > qualified people who can contribute to your idea. >=20 >=20 > Thanks, > Jan