Re: [PATCH] fix installation of wip/py-whel with differing pythons

[Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:37:11PM +0100, Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Actually my cargo-culting starting with ALTERNATIVES. But in my
> application, installing both Python 2.7 and 3.4 (3.5) toolchains, it
> would be dangerous to have any default binary without version suffix,
> because of surprises.

You won't get that. pkg_alternatives just links one of the two to the
non-versioned file name. Which ones is up to configuration by the
user.

> What I am wondering about: Should it be wheel-X.Y or wheelX.Y? I see
> inconsistent application of the dash in python-specific commands. So I
> guess one has to live with that?

I think with dash is better, but I also think that's not consistently
the case in pkgsrc. Feel free to send cleanup patches!

> > There are lots of examples for them in pkgsrc, and you already have
> > FILES_SUBST set.
> 
> Yeah, I figure it would work by simply adding that ALTERNATIVES that I
> had briefly (non-functional). But as I do not use pkg_alternatives, I
> would not test that naturally, so it is perhaps better someone else
> does that additional change.

It's very easy to test: just install pkg_alternatives, either before
or after py-wheel, then check if "wheel" exists and works.

I've committed your patch and added an ALTERNATIVES file.

Btw, you could have committed this yourself -- send me your ssh public
key and I'll add you to the pkgsrc-wip committers.

Cheers,
 Thomas