Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

sheddingbikes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 251 posts

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#241

Post by gizmomagico »

jrockway wrote: post #220
ubernostrum wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every distribution ships ancient versions. RHEL, meanwhile, does not ship 3.1, 2.7 or 2.6. And to be perfectly honest, if you're seriously distributing Python software you have to take RHEL into account -- "Fedora ships something newer" doesn't help.

I don't use Python at all. Despite that, I still somehow have Python 2.6.4 installed on my RHEL4 box at work. (Incidentally, the Linux version number is only slightly higher -- 2.6.9!!!) So it seems like it's possible to get 2.6 on RHEL. I did it, and I hate Python.

I can't help but note that hating Python seems irrational.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#242

Post by forgottenpaswrd »

If "python for linux sucks" I don't know what to say about python for mac or windows.

I have a lot of python programs that use OpenGL, matplotlib, and a lot other libraries. No problem or very little problems on Linux.

On mac 10.6 you have a limited python version and is very difficult to add matplotlib and other libs, with Windows is a similar pain in the ass, unless you buy it from a commercial scientific distro.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#243

Post by chousuke »

gaius wrote: post #86
jacquesm wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is one thing that ticks me off about modern unix it is that to install I end up having to install / upgrade half the rest of the system because of all the interdependencies between packages.

Tell me about it! I just wanted to install folding-mode for Emacs the other day, dselect wanted to install a new sodding IM client as well! (Something in emacs-goodies-el depended on it). About 50M it came to! So I just did it by hand, more like 50k...

That sounds weird. Are you sure it wasn't a "Recommends" instead of a dependecy?

If it really was a dependency, I think a bug should be filed against the package. :/

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#244

Post by bartl »

nailer wrote: post #203
zedshaw wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who don't do Python won't/can't use virtualenv. Also, you don't think that's a nasty workaround for something that should just be a non-issue? That's like you telling me to use NetBSD pkgsrc just to get around some ancient linux (which I have done).

Hi Zed. For the specific case of needing Python 2.6 on RHEL, ask your user to install the 'python26' package from EPEL. It's a semi official source of packages for RHEL including newer versions of OS tools that slot alongside those versions.

The problem with requiring an update to something like Python may break other programs. Not everything in Python (or Perl) is backward compatible.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#245

Post by nailer »

kfool wrote: post #228
nailer wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's no mechanism for identifying such minimum possible dependencies. Er, yes there is, and there has been for at least the last 12 years, and probably more. Requires: python >= 2.6.1

What you mention is a manual mechanism which is not often used. Instead, developers say: Requires: python The automatic mechanism in place is to run ldd, identify the list of libraries used by the executables distributed, and mark those libraries as dependencies. Since the package is build on your newer, Debian 5 package, it requires (automatically) the newer libfoo (like python-2.7), while it would have worked just…

>>> There's no mechanism for identifying such minimum possible dependencies.

>> Yes there is

> What you mention is a manual mechanism

I agree, they should ditch the automatic ldd method. I justy wanted to correct the inaccuracy of saying there wasn't a way to specify min versions.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#246

Post by nailer »

bartl wrote: post #244
nailer wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Zed. For the specific case of needing Python 2.6 on RHEL, ask your user to install the 'python26' package from EPEL. It's a semi official source of packages for RHEL including newer versions of OS tools that slot alongside those versions.

The problem with requiring an update to something like Python may break other programs. Not everything in Python (or Perl) is backward compatible.

Installing the 'python26' package doesn't update or change the installed Python in any way. That's why it was created.

* 'python' remains installed, at version 2.4

* 'python26' is now installed, into separate folders.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#247

Post by nailer »

zedshaw wrote: post #209
nailer wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Zed. For the specific case of needing Python 2.6 on RHEL, ask your user to install the 'python26' package from EPEL. It's a semi official source of packages for RHEL including newer versions of OS tools that slot alongside those versions.

Or, just rewrite in C and everyone except Python people will quit bitching. :-)

It seems nobody liked having a full language for default config file format anyway, so ditching it for something simpler may make people happier.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#248

Post by rbanffy »

zedshaw wrote: post #185
rbanffy wrote: post #41

It's funny how, for Zed, anything that doesn't work the way he thinks it's supposed to work is "broken" and the result of some boneheaded decision and that it "sucks". I too am frustrated by ancient versions of server OSs that use equally ancient versions of Python, but that's why virtualenv was invented. And source distributions. I am happy using it when required. Being "stable" in OS terms is not changing APIs very…

Actually, it's not that Python doesn't work the way I expect, it's that distros have killed Python's portability promise and made C more attractive. Granted I'm able to code C well enough to pull this off, but having to do this is annoying. Also, this is how things improve. Someone doesn't like the current state of affairs and changes it.

Are you implying that Python is not portable between distros? I say that because I am much more familiar with Red Hat and Debian-based flavors and, on both environments, Python seems rather sane, if somehow crufty sometimes.

What specific Python dependency did the move to C cure? What are the most common complains regarding libraries and versions? Perhaps listing them can help change whatever is wrong.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#249

Post by rbanffy »

pdonis wrote: post #237
rbanffy wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that if I really need generators, then I really need to install something newer than the 2.4 that comes with RHEL/CentOS 4. Generators is 2.6+, right? BTW, an ugly approach I used (more or less as a joke) was to check for generator availability and, in case I can't use them, use a list comprehension instead. There is a performance/memory hit but, depending on what you are doing, it's a usable alternative. And…

Um...generators are Python 2.2+ (introduction of the yield statement): http://docs.python.org/release/2.2/ref/yield.html Generator expressions are 2.4+: http://docs.python.org/release/2.4/ref/genexpr.html That said, I don't disagree with removing the Python dependency from the "core" of Mongrel2. As was noted in an earlier comment, people can always write a config file management tool in any language they want (or Mo…

> Generator expressions are 2.4+:

So, what is the big deal? I can swear the oldest Python I had to deal with for the last couple years was 2.4.

Re: Mongrel2 Says, "Goodbye Python"

#250

Post by JabavuAdams »

After several issues with Python, Lisp, Haskell, etc., I'm coming around to the philosophy of just generating C or C++ code from Python or Lisp.

Productivity is a function of (familiarity, language, libraries, configuration, runtime). Other languages may be great due to (language, library), but configuration can be a show-stopper. Especially since most devs seem to see library/wrapper writing as a chance to pull in all their favourite cruft dependencies.

Post reply on HN