| 1 |
On 24/03/2016 19:19, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 24 March 2016 11:54:03 Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> I'm not sure if this has changed but I think it used to be recommended |
| 5 |
>> not to set Python 3 stuff to active, at the time anyway. That may have |
| 6 |
>> changed. I read that either here or on -dev a good while back. May |
| 7 |
>> want to see what others think on this or it could be that everything you |
| 8 |
>> use works fine that way. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I saw that too, and I've always been sure to eselect python to 2.7, but for |
| 11 |
> a long time now the installation CD has come with 3.3 or 3.4 set, so I |
| 12 |
> assume it's okay to eselect 3.4 nowadays. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
It's probably not safe, python2 and python3 are basically different |
| 17 |
languages, not really compatible. Out there in the wild, there are still |
| 18 |
more python apps not migrated to use python3 than have been migrated. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
A user has 2 choices: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
- set python2 as default and configure packages that can use python3 to |
| 23 |
use it |
| 24 |
- set python3 as default and configure packages that requires python2 to |
| 25 |
use it |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Which method you use depends entirely on what packages you use. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 31 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives