python noarch vs arch

[Jesse Keating]

On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 16:40 +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 16:34 +0200, Sander Hoentjen wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I am working on packaging cohoba, this is a python gui client/mission
> > control for telepathy. It has one small .c file, so I have a few
> > questions:
> > - because of the .c file the package has to by arch-specific i guess. Is
> > there a strong preference to package as noarch? (the c part is used for
> > changing the name for killall, so to put it as noarch i can just leave
> > that part out (not being able to killall cohoba), or add a dependency on
> > python-ctypes and add a small patch to cohoba to use ctypes to do it
> > instead)
> > 

If it can use all pure python, that would be best for the upstream
project.  Why reinvent the wheel?

> i didn't want to send yet, so i'll continue:
> - should i just not care about arch vs noarch and package as arch
> specific, then where must i place the modules, all in python_sitelib and
> only osutils (the c one) in python_sitearch?
> 
> thanks for any pointers
> 

Due to the way that python works, if any part of a python's module is
arch specific (sitearch), the entire thing has to go into sitearch.
Python will not import part from sitearch and part from sitelib.  So
it'd all have to go in sitearch.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060902/eecd38c0/attachment.sig>