On Tue, 01 Aug 2006, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 7/25/06, Daniel Rall <dlr@collab.net> wrote:
> >I like the sound of David's suggested approach better. I found it
> >weird that autogen was to be removing the Python bytecode on the
> >grounds that we shouldn't be packaging them with the source tarball,
> >since it doesn't really strike me as autogen's job. Doing this in
> >dist.sh, on the other hand, is very appropriate, and satisfies Max's
> >desired behavior. I'd +1 a backport of that, but am -0 on the change
> >to autogen.
>
> Ditto.
>
> I'm also concerned that there is a spurious -print in autogen.sh right
> now that causes a bunch of junk to be printed - there's no need to
> emit any info even if we were to delete the pyc's from autogen.sh. --
Max, any updates on this one?
- Dan
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Tue Aug 8 23:33:42 2006