You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I've noticed that many packages are broken because of lack of installed dependecies. I agree that it should be pacman job to manage installation of those, however given how much maintanance it requires, PKGBUILD for every package and need to rebuild it after every change I think arch32 could make an exception.
WhatI'm thinking about is this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44357411
It generally gets good review so far.
The python package would need to be adapted to install only python itself, add cache directory to search path and remove cache directory after uninstallation. All dependencies would be then managed by uv by user. This would allow to remove maintanance of every other python dependnecies packages.
I do not use Python so I haven't tested it, also I have no access to 32 bit machines at the moment, however if there would be a consensus I could provide PKGBUILD skeleton for someone to take over.
Just a thought, not sure if posted in right sub.
Offline
Many python packages are broken for a while due to bootstrapping issues. is uv used by upstream arch, if not, we don't deviate from that path. I tried lately again to understand, how upstream bootstraps python, but I failed to understand it. There is a python-bootrap package
which in theory loads a binary minimal set of packages so that the rest can be bootstrapped from it, but I never managed to get past
meson or really simple (and necessary) Python packages.
Offline
From what I know mainstream repackages python packages as pacman ones.
I would normally agree about not deviating from mainstream, but system is kind of left in unreliable state when waiting for rebuild.
If arch32 had separate wiki describing differences, appropriate note abot alternatative package management for python could be put there.
Last edited by archevilst (2025-10-27 22:05:01)
Offline
Pages: 1