bin/python3 symlink for python3X ports

[Li-Wen Hsu]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 17:17:20 +0400, Ç÷ÈbÈ^ÈhÈfÈ^È_ ÈFÈ^ÈWÈUÈmÈZÈcÈ`Èd wrote:
> On 9/26/12 5:00 PM, Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
> >
> > I think this patch is good.  And I am thinking about also modifying
> > other lang/python{2,3}X ports, thus we may need to beware of
> > confliction on bin/python{2,3} between lang/python2X or lang/python3X
> > ports.  It is not so common but still possible to have more then one
> > lang/python2X or lang/python3X ports installed.  Maybe we can use the
> > same logic of bin/python installation (first wins).
> >
> >
> 
> I actually dislike the current "first wins" logic.  I hit that problem 
> recently.

To be honest, I also realized this would cause problems just after
sending my previous mail.  This would generate conflicting packages of
python[23]*.  This definitely needs to be fixed.  I apologize of
committing this bug (three years ago!)

> I think this choice should be done via make.conf variable (with some 
> default value hardcoded in bsd.python.mk).
> The resulting packages should not depend on the order two pythons are 
> installed in.
> (probaly defaulting python -> python2.X is the proper choice).

This is what we did originally, and I thought what Josh said is
reasonable:

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/109550

I'm still thinking about a good solution, any suggestions?

My current thought is there might be no perfect solution of this, and
what ${PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION} defined should get /usr/local/bin/python,
any other ports need specified version python should modify their
shebang with ${PYTHON_CMD}.

> Let maintainers take the final decision and implement it though.

I think that all people on this list are the maintainers, the only
difference is some of us having commit bit and need to serve others
more. :)

-- 
Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu at FreeBSD.org>
http://lwhsu.org