After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 766640 - Consider using a direct path in the #! line of gnome-tweak-tool
Consider using a direct path in the #! line of gnome-tweak-tool
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 771910
Product: gnome-tweak-tool
Classification: Applications
Component: general
3.18.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GNOME Tweak Tool maintainer(s)
GNOME Tweak Tool maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2016-05-18 23:51 UTC by Thomas Repetti
Modified: 2017-06-07 01:41 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Thomas Repetti 2016-05-18 23:51:29 UTC
Hi all,

Not so much of a bug but a general suggestion/call for feedback. Since gnome-tweak-tool is fairly important DE software, I wanted to run the idea by you of forcing its interpreter to be /usr/bin/python as opposed to the python instance found by /usr/bin/env. I tend to like to try out different Python interpreters and do not always do this within a virtualenv. I imagine that others might do the same and also prefer their default Python in their path to be a different, newer Python interpreter as opposed to the one intended to be their system default.

Since the system-default /usr/bin/python(2) is standardized by https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/, and there seems to be little to gain by using the env lookup, but there are cases where using env lookup would cause the gnome-tweak-tool to fail, does switching to the hardcoded interpeter make sense to you?

Let me know what you think, and thank you for maintaining such a useful tool.

-Tom
Comment 1 Jeremy Bicha 2017-06-07 01:41:27 UTC
Thanks for taking the time to report this.
This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but we are happy to tell you that the problem has already been fixed in the code repository.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 771910 ***