Python client code (was, Mandrake RPMs uploaded)

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Python client code (was, Mandrake RPMs uploaded)
Date: 2002-03-05 22:58:57
Message-ID: 3C854DB1.E7393672@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

> > ... the python package has "mx" as a prerequisite to RPM
> > installation. I see no such package available on my Mandrake box, and
> > the python code seems to build and install without it. What is the
> > package and why might it be required? If it is a RH-specific feature,
> > should we put in a test to make it optional?
> The mx package is required by the new python client code. It will indeed
> build without mx, but it will not RUN without it. See rpmfind.net for
> sources -- the name 'mx' is a RedHatism, and the same package goes by another
> name, which I don't remember right off.

What in the package requires "mx"? Ah, I see in the release notes that
"mxDateTime" is required for running the DBI-compatible interface.

The general "mx" set of packages is a mix of free and non-free software,
though mxDateTime seems to be covered in the former. License wording at
the end, in case anyone cares.

In the meantime, I'll build these packages for Mandrake, since only one
or two other distros seem to bother with them at all. And since
mxDateTime (and Distutils, required by RH's mx package build) *could* be
installed without RPMs, istm that it should be a configure test rather
than an RPM prerequisite. Comments?

- Thomas

The Public License is very similar to the Python 2.0 license and covers
the open source software made available by eGenix.com which is free of
charge even for commercial
use.

The Commercial License is intended for covering commercial
eGenix.com software, notably the mxODBC package. Only private and
non-commercial use is free of charge.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Bartley 2002-03-05 23:07:29 Re: FATAL 2: RelationPutHeapTuple: failed to add tuple
Previous Message gelinas 2002-03-05 22:08:26 Index not used with user

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nicolas Bazin 2002-03-05 23:22:14 Fw: Postgresql backend to perform vacuum automatically
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2002-03-05 22:56:52 Re: A result was returned by the statement, when none was expected