Re: PYTHONPATH issue analysis - part 3

[Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl>]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:02:03PM +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Am 13.03.2018 um 22:44 schrieb Pjotr Prins:
> > Another problem is that it does not cover special cases where, for
> > example you compile Python with SSL and without. You don't want them
> > to share user installed libs.
> 
> Upstream does not handle this case, so I do not see a need to handle
> this in guix. If we find a way, this would be find. But prior to solving
> the optional we should solve the compulsory :-)

  https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/configure#L1543

and there are many other options which define the behaviour of the
interpreter. We don't use them in GNU Guix, but it does not mean we
should not think about it/allow it.

I am nit picking a bit, but the problem is that we don't have a full
solution unless we can isolate the instances and the packages they can
install (themselves).

Using one PYTHONPATH is ultimately Python's failure - I agree with
Ludo that people should do what they want with it. Bringing in an
extra GUIX_PYTHONPATH_$VER will confuse things (and probably break it
for some people).

I propose we patch the interpreter to tell about the Guix paths. It
probably only needs to be done in one place. They should go after the
PYTHONPATH as it is done by Python itself, like you suggested earlier.

That is an acceptable approach. Just a little annoyance with every
Python upgrade.

Pj.