Attn: Install path debaters

Gary E. Miller gem at
Wed Jan 3 22:44:48 UTC 2018

Yo Ian!

On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 16:25:34 -0600
Ian Bruene via devel <devel at> wrote:

> > Uh, news to me that any solution was agreed to.  Last I heard this
> > group was in no way on the same page.
> >
> > Rather than having me misread your code, can you put a plain
> > summary here?  
> It's rlaager's code, the bash sys.path in each program one.

Then maybe rlaager can provide a summary of the 4 different cases:

	A. distro install: /etc, /bin, etc.
        B. system install: /usr/local/etc, /usr/local/etc, etc.
        C. user install: ~/etc, ~/etc, etc. or similar
        D. packager install: /tmp/etc, /tmp/bin, going into a package

And, most important, in some systems, all FOUR must be able to
> But since September everyone has been locked in a loop:

Yup.  Because we really need 4 totally different solutions, people
keep trying to get to 1.

No otehr projects seem to have this loop issue...

> 1. Violate FHS. If this is kosher then it is also kosher to mangle
> the user's PYTHONPATH and we should do that instead.

Only for B. and C.  No other packages seem to need to violate the FHS.
I agree PYTHONPATH is the standard solution used by all.

> 2. Old system of modules randomly inaccessible. (I would be tolerant
> of this)

Uh, lost me.  What old system?  NTPsec has been using PYTHONPATH just

> 3. .pth files. I'm not clear about why these are horribly broken, but 
> they must be or they would have not been shot down as soon as they
> were mentioned.

Once again, only usefull for SOME cases of B. and C.  Violates the
FHS.  Breaks many use cases where A., B., C., and/or D. co-exist.

> 4. The nightmare of !615

I've not looked at the code.  Care to elaborate?

> 5. Have I forgotten something?

Taht is a given.  :-)

> > And yet, other projects do not have this problem???  
> This is not helpful. Someone needs to give a concrete example of
> another project that achieves this (and where the solution is
> compatible with waf) so we can see what they are doing.

Do not conflate two different issues:
	1. where and how to install
        2. host to get waf to do 1.

I have taken no position on #2 as we have not agree on #1.

No point thinking about how to do #2 until #1 is agreed.

Is it more helpfuil if I mention that gpsd has no issues with A., B., C.,
and D.  gpsd does the totally standard python install thing, just like
ntpsec needs to.

> > Care to shaare that ccomment so I do not need to dig???  
> Not yet written. It would summarize the issues we have had and why we 
> picked the particular solution.

Well then, that needs to be done.  If we can't agree on the summary then
the 615 code can't be merged.

Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
	gem at  Tel:+1 541 382 8588

	    Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
    "If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the devel mailing list