IMO rpm is right and the test is wrong. It does not make
> any sense to require a running X just to check that pygtk is
In principle, I certainly agree with you. In practice, I think this
is harder than it sounds, because several of us have tried to make a
build/configure system that 1) works and 2) doesn't require X, and
obviously we have failed. Whle it certainly must be possible, we
clearly haven't found the right apporaches for GTK* and Tk*.
>> The mysterious part is why bdist_rpm /used/ to work for mpl as
>> of 0.83.2. It could be either that a change in mpl's build
>> made it more sensitive to X11 issues than before, or that
>> Fedora3 updated its rpm build scripts between those days and
>> today, and that now they do this 'unset DISPLAY'. But given
>> that on Ubuntu and Mandriva it's working OK, I wouldn't worry
>> too much about it. Having that feedback was a good outcome of
>> this thread, even if I can't upgrade in our lab
> The usual trick in rpms it to require a nest X to test for
I'm not sure I understand this. We have the following
print 'GTK requires pygtk'
print 'pygtk present but import failed'
The ImportError is designed to catch the case where pygtk is not
present and the RuntimeError is designed to warn but not fail if X is
not present. I'll do some testing tonight to see if I can isolate
where this is failing.