Comment 15 for bug 248558

(In reply to comment #6)

> I looked quickly at the patching that is done on site.py in the python package
> and it's pretty minimal and it didn't look to be related.

Well, it is surely related, because it (at least) changes one of the sitedirs and adds another one on a 64 bit system. Here's one of the most relevant chunks from python/F-10/python-2.5-lib64.patch (applied as patch No. 102):

--- Python-2.5b1/Lib/site.py.lib64 2006-06-12 04:23:02.000000000 -0400
+++ Python-2.5b1/Lib/site.py 2006-06-22 12:20:35.000000000 -0400
@@ -182,9 +182,14 @@
                 sitedirs = [os.path.join(prefix, "Lib", "site-packages")]
             elif os.sep == '/':
                 sitedirs = [os.path.join(prefix,
- "lib",
+ "lib64",
                                          "python" + sys.version[:3],
                                          "site-packages"),
+ os.path.join(prefix,
+ "lib",
+ "python" + sys.version[:3],
+ "site-packages"),
+ os.path.join(prefix, "lib64", "site-python"),
                             os.path.join(prefix, "lib", "site-python")]
             else:
                 sitedirs = [prefix, os.path.join(prefix, "lib", "site-packages")]

Imho that's exactly the sort of patch that should either be removed from the python package, or added to the virtualenv package. And there might be some other relevant chunks in that patch.

Maybe we should get one of the main python package's maintainers on board here?

> I guess I could make a patch that generates full path pth's off of whats
> in the site-packages dir(s). I don't know if that really makes sense though
> since it's per package.

That doesn't sound like the right (and neither a feasible) solution to me.