Package Details: python2-bin 2.7.18_1-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/python2-bin.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: python2-bin
Description: Python2 binaries for x86_64
Upstream URL: https://python.org
Keywords: python2
Licenses: PSF
Conflicts: python2
Provides: python2
Submitter: vanillabase1lb
Maintainer: vanillabase1lb
Last Packager: vanillabase1lb
Votes: 6
Popularity: 1.92
First Submitted: 2022-09-27 15:58 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2022-11-21 17:25 (UTC)

Pinned Comments

vanillabase1lb commented on 2022-09-27 16:07 (UTC)

Build flags and binaries present here - https://github.com/VanillaBase1lb/python2-bin-aur

Latest Comments

1 2 Next › Last »

vanillabase1lb commented on 2022-11-21 17:26 (UTC)

Thanks @Fall, should work now.

Fall commented on 2022-11-21 17:03 (UTC)

Upgrading this package while having system python installed results in this:

error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
python2-bin: /usr/share/man/man1/python.1.gz exists in filesystem (owned by python)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
 -> exit status 1

Patch/workaround that worked for me:

diff --git a/PKGBUILD b/PKGBUILD
index 62ef404..b99b072 100644
--- a/PKGBUILD
+++ b/PKGBUILD
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ package() {
        rm python2-build/bin/pydoc
        rm python2-build/bin/python
        rm python2-build/bin/python-config
+       rm python2-build/share/man/man1/python.1

        sed -i "s|/mnt/storage/temp/python2-build|/usr|" python2-build/bin/python${_pybasever}-config
        sed -i "s|/mnt/storage/temp/python2-build|/usr|" python2-build/lib/pkgconfig/python-${_pybasever}.pc

vanillabase1lb commented on 2022-11-21 16:35 (UTC)

I've reworked the PKGBUILD script and all the issues in previous comments seem to be resolved. Ping here if there is something else broken.

camsington commented on 2022-11-06 06:02 (UTC)

I concur with @eclairevoyant that having binaries built by unknown third parties and offered under official-sounding names is a dangerous practice.

bkb commented on 2022-11-02 14:45 (UTC)

Sure, and compiling every binaries over here on need and copy it instead of downloading binaries over the web

eclairevoyant commented on 2022-11-02 11:46 (UTC)

I don't mean it as jumping on mistakes or anything, everyone can make mistakes. My point is more that python never had binary releases for Linux so we have to rely on an unofficial binary package... doesn't seem like a good idea. It would be an easy way to add in extra code which to me is an unnecessary risk.

Also, to @bkb's point anyone who needs this package should be able to build the regular package on a better machine and simply copy it over to the machines that are weaker. Since this only supports x86_64 anyway, no need to even cross-compile.

vanillabase1lb commented on 2022-11-02 06:14 (UTC)

I agree that this package has it's own place and that it needs a bit more work to be done. I will try to make it a bit cleaner when I get time, meanwhile any contributions are welcome.

bkb commented on 2022-11-02 05:58 (UTC)

If you have low computational power, high networking power, build a lot of Arch machines. I think it's useful, just that it needs a little bit more of caring

eclairevoyant commented on 2022-11-01 23:16 (UTC)

Why does this package need to exist? Python never provided a binary release of python2, and it's not like python2 is going to be changing anytime soon; should be able to just build it once using the python2 AUR package and not worry about it for a while.

drws commented on 2022-10-30 20:53 (UTC) (edited on 2022-11-01 12:42 (UTC) by drws)

Module select also appers to be missing. Also, there is a considerable size difference in the built package. Might be an indication of an improper build.