Gentoo Archives: gentoo-python

From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
To: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-python <gentoo-python@l.g.o>, Gentoo Python Project <python@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-python] Re: Naming of PyPy and PyPy3 executables
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 22:34:46
Message-Id: CAJ0EP40hgaYstZb9Ti5_dbTctywjypcfP0oAHY9wsEHXmT2x=A@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-python] Naming of PyPy and PyPy3 executables by "Michał Górny"
1 On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
2 > Hello,
3 >
4 > Let's open an official discussion about this.
5 >
6 >
7 > First of all, what happens on Gentoo. The PyPy's build process creates
8 > an executable named 'pypy-c'. We install it with this name, and symlink
9 > as /usr/bin/pypy-cX.Y for each PyPy version. We don't do any 'common'
10 > wrapper for PyPy.
11 >
12 > Upstream's packaging scripts, however, rename the 'pypy-c' executable
13 > to 'pypy'. All other distros I have checked (Arch, Debian, Fedora,
14 > Ubuntu) install a single /usr/bin/pypy for them. They don't support
15 > multiple versions though.
16 >
17 > At the point, it seems reasonable to drop our '-c' addition and just
18 > use 'pypyX.Y' (+ 'pypy') instead. We could do this starting with 2.1
19 > but...
20 >
21 >
22 > Since v2.1, PyPy has been 'split' into PyPy and PyPy3, the former being
23 > Python2 variant and the latter Python3. Both share the same versions
24 > (that is, there's PyPy 2.1 and PyPy3 2.1).
25 >
26 > From what floppym checked, the build process builds plain 'pypy-c'
27 > as well. Alike regular PyPy, upstream's scripts rename it to 'pypy'.
28 >
29 > Since PyPy3 is still in beta, only Arch Linux has packages for it. It
30 > installs a single /usr/bin/pypy3 (what a surprise).
31 >
32 >
33 > This raises the question: how should we name our PyPy executables?
34 > While I really like the 'pypyX.Y' idea, I don't really want to see
35 > 'pypy32.1' :). We could go for 'pypy-X.Y' and 'pypy3-X.Y' but that would
36 > be inconsistent with CPython (pythonX.Y) and Jython (jythonX.Y0).
37 > A somehow ugly alternative would be to use 'pypy-cX.Y' and 'pypy3-cX.Y'
38 > but that is quite a custom invention.
39 >
40 > Your thoughts?
41 >
42
43 How about pypypy2.1? ;-)
44
45 Sorry, I couldn't resist.