On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:29:34PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
On 12/12/2013 04:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> +++ b/autobuild.sh
>>> @@ -13,6 +13,12 @@ python setup.py build
>>> python setup.py test
>>> python setup.py install --root="$AUTOBUILD_INSTALL_ROOT"
>>>
>>
>> I haven't tested it, but shouldn't these lines ^^, and others similar
>> to them, be changed to "python2" in case my default python version is
>> 3? And if those "python2" are checked as well, it would be usable
>> even without python2.
>
> Yes, we should use python2
But does 'python2' exist in PATH on RHEL5? You have to be careful that
whatever solution you have works on systems with only one python
installed (whether that be old systems with python 2, or bleeding edge
systems with _only_ python 3).
Yes, it is. Python started to use these names quite a long time ago.
We could even build with different python 2 versions (python2.6,
python2.7, etc.) which are properly instantiated, I believe, in all
stable to modern distros.
Running any versioned binary should be checked for anyway, so we don't
end up in a situation where we're calling one that doesn't exist, IMHO.
Martin