Re: pybitmessage, python2-pyqt-4 - strace and packages

[Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>]

ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> writes:

> Hi,
>
>
> Ricardo Wurmus writes:
>
>> ng <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> writes:
>>
>>>> […]
>>>>> open("/gnu/store/2mz84alls2i314x4506wdw15zwmz82n8-python-2.7.10/lib/python2.7/site-packages/PyQt4.so",
>>>>> O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>>>>> open("/gnu/store/2mz84alls2i314x4506wdw15zwmz82n8-python-2.7.10/lib/python2.7/site-packages/PyQt4module.so",
>>>>> O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>>>>> open("/gnu/store/2mz84alls2i314x4506wdw15zwmz82n8-python-2.7.10/lib/python2.7/site-packages/PyQt4.py",
>>>>> O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>>>>> open("/gnu/store/2mz84alls2i314x4506wdw15zwmz82n8-python-2.7.10/lib/python2.7/site-packages/PyQt4.pyc",
>>>>> O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>>>>> write(1, "ERROR: The PyQt4 package is not "..., 104ERROR: The PyQt4
>>>>> package is not available. PyBitmessage requires PyQt 4.8 or later
>>>>> and Qt 4.7 or later.
>>>>
>>>> Have you checked what files are installed by your pyqt-4 package?  Do
>>>> any of the files that are searched for appear in the output of that
>>>> package?
>>>
>>> tree level 3 looks like this of python2-pyqt-4:
>>> (shadowwalker) ng0
>>> /gnu/store/y0r1d5sgskvpxi2k64afjrc35c8l3bqs-python2-pyqt-4-4.11.4$
>>> tree -L 3
>> […]
>>
>>> So packages are in python2.7 ... i don't know the consensus for
>>> Guix, should it be 2.7.10 or 2.7 in folder structure? 2.7 makes
>>> more sense to me.
>>
>> The directory is usually called “./lib/python2.7/site-packages/”, so
>> that’s fine.  Your response wasn’t clear, though: have you actually
>> confirmed that the files it looks for are installed by your
>> “python2-pyqt-4” package?
>
> They are there, but not in the expected place. From pyqt's
> perspective I changed nothing, I just leave it as the other
> pyqt's.

What is the expected place?  I guess that it really just looks in all
directories on the PYTHONPATH, so setting that might be sufficient.

>> If they are in fact there you would need to augment the PYTHONPATH.
>> This is done automatically by the “python-build-system”.  Is there a
>> good reason you are using the “gnu-build-system” here?
>>
>> ~~ Ricardo
>
> That I need to run make on the file which gets copied to
> $PREFIX/lib/ is not a reason to use gnu-build-system.
>
> What is, is that I started this package on the base of thinking
> that a lack of a setup.py or similar files means that I'll use
> either trivial- or gnu-build-system.

I cannot make a recommendation either way, because I haven’t looked at
the contents of the source archive.  It’s just another option in case
you end up replicating a lot of the things that the python-build-system
already does for you.

~~ Ricardo