STINNER Victor wrote:
> 
> STINNER Victor <victor.stinner@haypocalc.com> added the comment:
> 
> It's really hard to follow this issue. I'm trying to sum up, please comment my message if I'm wrong.
> 
> --
> 
> If I understood correctly, this issue has 3 remaining points:
> 
> (1) Python 2.7 and 3.2: force sys.platform to 'linux2'? Votes:
> 
> Antoine Pitrou: -1
> Victor Stinner: +0
> Martin von Gagern: +1
> Barry A. Warsaw: +1
> Martin v. Löwis: +1
> Marc-Andre Lemburg: +1

I voted -1 on this, not +1. For existing releases, we cannot change
the value of the sys variable and as explained this is not needed
either. IMHO, it's better to fix the few cases in Python that use
'linux2' to also include 'linux3' (either literally or via
.startswith()) and also add a plat-linux3/ dir.

> => total=+3 (6 votes)
> 
> (2) Python 3.3: change sys.platform to 'linux'? Votes:
> 
> Martin v. Löwis: +1
> Charles-François Natali: -1
> Amaury Forgeot d'Arc: -1
> Antoine Pitrou: -0 ?
> Victor Stinner: +1

I voted +1 on this one.

I also suggested to apply the version removal to all platforms,
not just Linux.

> => total=0 (5 votes)
> 
> (3) Python 3.3: if point (2) is accepted, add a new variable providing more information about the build platform
> 
> --
> 
> For the first point, it looks like most people agree to keep 'linux2' on Linux 3 for Python 2.7 and 3.2. I converted Matthias Klose's patch (msg140061) into a patch for Python 3.2: configure_linux2.python3.2.patch. If this patch is accepted, changesets 69dd70e70cc8 (2.7) and 9e3b28a7898f (3.2) have to be reverted (issue #12571).
> 
> I prefer to do nothing for (1), but users usually prefer software that "just work". Example: see Arch Linux fiasco when they chose to use Python 3 for /usr/bin/python. Some distro (Debian and Ubuntu?) will anyway use this approach.
> 
> --
> 
> For the second point, there is no consensus.
> 
> I changed my vote from -1 to +1 because... I would like to close the issue (!) and I agree that I will easier to manipulate 'linux' instead of 'linux2' or 'linux3' or 'linux4' or ... (we have such problem today with freebsd2..freebsd8).
> 
> --
> 
> For the last point, point (3): I think that it would be easier to wait until the point (2) is decided, because the point (3) depends on point (2).
> 
> @Marc-Andre Lemburg: you might open a different issue (when point 2 will be deciced)? I consider that it is a different topic because sysconfig already contains requested informations and so it's more a new feature.

That would make sense, except that I view the removal of the
version and the addition of the compile time information as one
feature request. Moving this off to the sysconfig is not realistic
as mentioned before and the new variable doesn't really cost much
in terms maintenance, since it can be auto-generated by configure.