On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 9:25 AM Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> wrote:
On 2019-09-11 16:05:15 +0200 (+0200), Dominig ar Foll (Intel Open Source) wrote: [...]
Remains to decide if we call directly python2 or just python. For me enforcing python2 by the OBS build system is easy (a simple "prefer: python2" statement in "project config" , so I would be happy to not enforce the pythin release on a per packet basis, but the people working on Pythin3 support may have a different opinion that I would like to know.
The "python" (or "python2") and "python3" executables are interpreters for different programming languages. General consensus is that making a "python3" interpreter available as "python" is incorrect. A few distros have gone against this advice (notably Arch Linux), and have created a fair amount of pain for software authors as a result. I recommend using either #!/usr/bin/python2 or #!/usr/bin/python3 for clarity, and avoiding #!/usr/bin/python in new scripts if possible (but certainly never put #!/usr/bin/python in a Python-3.x-only script and expect the underlying system to provide a python3-compatible interpreter at /usr/bin/python, that's just asking for trouble). -- Jeremy Stanley
So we agree that either #!/usr/bin/python2 or #!/usr/bin/python3 is better than #!/usr/bin/env . Am I right ? how many files needs this change ?
_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss