| 2007-05-08 09:27:50 |
BryanLawrence |
bug |
|
|
added bug |
| 2007-05-08 12:04:48 |
Scott Kitterman |
kubuntu-meta: status |
Unconfirmed |
Rejected |
|
| 2007-05-08 12:04:48 |
Scott Kitterman |
kubuntu-meta: statusexplanation |
|
First, upgrades from Dapper direct to Feisty are not supported. Second, if you installed your own Python 2.5 outside the packaging system there are now two installed, also not a configuration we can support. So this is not an Ubuntu bug (thus marked rejected).
I believe your analysis is correct about some programs using the local version of Python. What I would suggest you do is remove that version of Python and see if that solves your problem. Since things work with /usr/local is not mounted, then I think removing the Python version there is likely to succeed. If it doesn't, then I'd suggest opening a support request in the Answers section of LP and see if someone there has suggestions. |
|
| 2007-05-08 13:40:56 |
Scott Kitterman |
kubuntu-meta: status |
Rejected |
Needs Info |
|
| 2007-05-08 13:40:56 |
Scott Kitterman |
kubuntu-meta: statusexplanation |
First, upgrades from Dapper direct to Feisty are not supported. Second, if you installed your own Python 2.5 outside the packaging system there are now two installed, also not a configuration we can support. So this is not an Ubuntu bug (thus marked rejected).
I believe your analysis is correct about some programs using the local version of Python. What I would suggest you do is remove that version of Python and see if that solves your problem. Since things work with /usr/local is not mounted, then I think removing the Python version there is likely to succeed. If it doesn't, then I'd suggest opening a support request in the Answers section of LP and see if someone there has suggestions. |
OK. Fair enough. I thought you had upgraded direct to Feisty. There were a lot of Python changes Dapper --> Edgy --> Feisty to support the new Python policy.
If you fire up Python with usr/local mounted and do:
import sys
print sys.path
What do you get?
I'm not sure about the right package for this, but python defaults seems like a step in the right direction. This is unlikely to be something KDE/Kubuntu specific. |
|
| 2007-05-08 14:59:22 |
Scott Kitterman |
python-defaults: status |
Needs Info |
Rejected |
|
| 2007-05-08 14:59:22 |
Scott Kitterman |
python-defaults: statusexplanation |
OK. Fair enough. I thought you had upgraded direct to Feisty. There were a lot of Python changes Dapper --> Edgy --> Feisty to support the new Python policy.
If you fire up Python with usr/local mounted and do:
import sys
print sys.path
What do you get?
I'm not sure about the right package for this, but python defaults seems like a step in the right direction. This is unlikely to be something KDE/Kubuntu specific. |
Done (rejected) and good luck. |
|
| 2007-05-08 16:13:09 |
Daniel Hahler |
title |
kde applications fail due to library problem |
python applications fail due to library problem |
|
| 2007-05-21 12:26:00 |
Scott Kitterman |
python-defaults: status |
Rejected |
Unconfirmed |
|
| 2007-05-21 12:26:00 |
Scott Kitterman |
python-defaults: statusexplanation |
Done (rejected) and good luck. |
OK. I've marked this back to unconfirmed then. I've got no say in Python policy in Ubuntu, but I'd guess we are going to tend to follow Debian on this. Please file a bug in Debian BTS and then link this bug to the Debian one (or comment with the Bug number and I'll do it if you don't know how). |
|
| 2007-07-17 12:56:15 |
Matthias Klose |
python-defaults: status |
New |
Won't Fix |
|
| 2007-07-17 12:56:15 |
Matthias Klose |
python-defaults: statusexplanation |
OK. I've marked this back to unconfirmed then. I've got no say in Python policy in Ubuntu, but I'd guess we are going to tend to follow Debian on this. Please file a bug in Debian BTS and then link this bug to the Debian one (or comment with the Bug number and I'll do it if you don't know how). |
> This is not the default python install behaviour (and nor should it be).
> Obviously I now need to get round this, and will, but actually I reckon
> this is an ubuntu problem that needs to push back to DEBIAN ...
No, it's Debian policy to include this path.
|
|
