Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 42592 - python 2.3 doesn't work with tk 8.4.x
Summary: python 2.3 doesn't work with tk 8.4.x
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 42590
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All All
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-02-23 06:36 UTC by David Grant
Modified: 2005-07-17 13:06 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description David Grant 2004-02-23 06:36:24 UTC
Python 2.3 doesn't seem to want to play with tk 8.4.  I need tk 8.4 because it's open file dialog supports opening multiple files, but tk 8.3 doesn't.

According to python's website, python 2.3 is supposed to support or come with tk 8.4.

Upgrading to tk 8.4 gives some errors, so I re-emerged python-2.3.  It fixed those errors, but now I get the error, "cannot load _tkinter module".  Looking in /usr/lib/pyton2.3/lib-dynload, I see _tkinter_failed.so.  python2.2 and python2.1 have the proper _tkinter.so module there.

I tried tk 8.4.3 and 8.4.5, but don't work with python 2.3.

Can someone first tell me, is this a bug?  Or did I do something wrong?
Comment 1 David Grant 2004-02-23 08:47:45 UTC
whoops, this bug was created twice.  See bug #42590
Comment 2 Martin Holzer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-02-23 08:49:11 UTC
please leave it
Comment 3 Martin Holzer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-02-23 08:49:26 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42590 ***
Comment 4 David Grant 2004-02-23 08:53:07 UTC
Sorry to be picky but isn't INVALID the correct resolution here?

It was not reported twice by two different people.  It was reported by me twice because I hit the submit button and then hit the refresh button after that accidentally.

I wouldn't be this picky normally, but you seemed to be picky enough to go to the trouble of reopening it and marking it as duplicate.  I was just curious if there is a reason?