Bugzilla Bug 212830

I suppose a python USE flag linked to --with/--without-python would be a good
idea there.

Also, it does not use the usual postinst/postrm functions for python code so
pyc/pyo files are orphaned after removal.

Is there a reason to make the bindings optional?  It's not like you can have a
system without python...

(the postinst/postrm need to be fixed, tho)

When you build for ROOT you _can_ have a system without Python. Think embedded
systems.

Sure, and such a system won't install the bindings, because it doesn't have
python.  I'm against adding use flags if they don't change the deps.

No such a system _will_ install the bindings because there _is_ python on
ROOT=/ .

It's an automagic dep right now, add a python? ( dev-lang/python ) dependency
like almost any other package with optional python bindings has and it will be
fine.

Also, why should I install python bindings I'm not ever going to use? This is
what we do already for almost everything else on the tree by the way.

If nothing in the tree uses the python bindings to gamin, we might as well use
--without-python and be done with it.

What say you?

what about users having developing something using those bindings?
Or using an overlay with a package depending on it?
Insert that python USE-flag and dependency like everyone else!

fixed in -r1.

and in case anyone wonder why there is no postrm/postinst, it is because gamin
doesn't install .py, just bindings

correction, I didn't see the .py so it's now fixed.

"${ROOT}" probably should be used also for python_mod_cleanup in pkg_postrm().

(In reply to comment #11)
> "${ROOT}" probably should be used also for python_mod_cleanup in pkg_postrm().
> 

no there is no need to in pkg_postrm.