Re: RPM Build Problem: installed but unpackaged .pyo and .pyc files

["Paul Johnson" <pauljohn32 gmail com>]

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Beth Stetzler
<beth stetzler usno navy mil> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have made a .spec file to build an RPM that is to install some shell
> scripts and Python scripts.  The Python scripts are giving BUILD errors.
>  The errors say that the .pyo and .pyc files are installed but not packaged.
>  I understand Python compiles these at runtime.  I'm hoping someone can
> assist with how to fix these problems.  I have tested the .py scripts, but I
> do not see the .pyc and .pyo files.  They are not in the tarball I created.
>  Would Python have put them in a random location?  My Python version is 2.4
> and the library directory site packages is /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages.
>

I know of some bandaids for this.

1. Fix your spec file to add the pyc files. Go to your %files directive.

2. Tell RPM to ignore the unpackaged files.
Put this at the top of the spec file:

%define _unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0

3. Install the package "checkInstall".  That will generate an RPM "on
the fly" after a make.  You will see exactly where all the installed
files go. It does not check anything, it does not make a fully
legitimate spec file.  But it does help you see where all the things
get put.

A deeper approach is to fix the install.  My python knowledge is
limited, but I *believe* that the you might be smart to keep the pyc
files because they will execute faster than the py versions.  Python
won't re-generate the pyc file if it is current, ie based on same py
file as you have.    I don't see pyo files resulting from "make
install".  I do see them after make.

Other poster is correct. You should get some SRPM files from python
programs and study their spec files.

pj





-- 
Paul E. Johnson
Professor, Political Science
1541 Lilac Lane, Room 504
University of Kansas