[arch-dev-public] Strange behaviour of pacman

[Aaron Griffin]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:10:24 -0500
> Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Daniel Isenmann
>> <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:02:15 -0400
>> > Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Aaron Griffin
>> >> <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Eric Bélanger
>> >> > <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Aaron Griffin
>> >> >> <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Isenmann
>> >> >>> <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
>> >> >>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:08:33 -0500
>> >> >>>> Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Daniel Isenmann
>> >> >>>>> <daniel.isenmann at gmx.de> wrote:
>> >> >>>>> > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:45:20 -0400
>> >> >>>>> > Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>> >
>> >> >>>>> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Travis Willard
>> >> >>>>> >> <twillard2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>> >> >> As I can see now, these are .pyo files. Are they
>> >> >>>>> >> >> generate at runtime or something like that? They are
>> >> >>>>> >> >> not in the package.
>> >> >>>>> >> >>
>> >> >>>>> >> >
>> >> >>>>> >> > .pyo files are, I believe, "optimized" python files
>> >> >>>>> >> > generated during runtime.
>> >> >>>>> >> >
>> >> >>>>> >>
>> >> >>>>> >> I beleiie so too.  I think there was a thread about how to
>> >> >>>>> >> deal with these files.  I think the info is in a wiki
>> >> >>>>> >> article about python packaging guidelines. The other
>> >> >>>>> >> remaining file is wicd.log wich is generated at runtime
>> >> >>>>> >> too.
>> >> >>>>> >
>> >> >>>>> > I have nothing found about those files. The article about
>> >> >>>>> > python package guidelines is very short. Nothing special
>> >> >>>>> > about it.
>> >> >>>>> >
>> >> >>>>> > The log file is acceptable, but the pyo files are annyoing.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I imagine that this only happens with apps run as root (or
>> >> >>>>> have write permissions to their install dir).
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I think the best thing, for the time being, is to do this in
>> >> >>>>> a pre_remove (so you have access to pacman -Ql at that time)
>> >> >>>>> and do something like:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> PKGNAME=wicd
>> >> >>>>> pre_remove () {
>> >> >>>>>     for pyo in $(pacman -Qql $PKGNAME  | grep \.py$ | sed
>> >> >>>>> 's|.py$|.pyo|g'); do if [ -f "$pyo" ]; then
>> >> >>>>>             rm "$pyo"
>> >> >>>>>         fi
>> >> >>>>>     done
>> >> >>>>> }
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Ok, I will do it this way, but shouldn't we have a better
>> >> >>>> solution for this for the future?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Well, the only sane way to do it would be to make sure pacman
>> >> >>> tracks the .pyo files by generating them as part of the package
>> >> >>> creation process, but I don't even know if that's possible
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> it's possible. Just create empty files with the same name with
>> >> >> 'touch' in the build function.
>> >> >
>> >> > Looks like python -O py_compile.py foo.py will do this. And it
>> >> > looks like setuptools has an --optimize argument. I'd suggest
>> >> > trying this
>> >> >
>> >> > python setup.py install --optimize=1 ...other args...
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> yeah, just found that here:
>> >> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Allan/Python_Packaging_Policy
>> >
>> > Why wasn't that added to the "official" Python Packaging Policy
>> > here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Python_Package_Guidelines
>> >
>> > I will change that in the next package version of wicd. I just
>> > committed the other "fix", don't want to release the next package
>> > right now. Have to remember that page.
>>
>> Added it :)
>
> The only problem is, that architecture 'any' doesn't work anymore with
> this install option. But I think that this problem doesn't affect so
> much packages to worry about, I think.

Are you saying that the .pyo files are no longer architecture
independent? I was under the assumption they were.