Re: [xml] Patch: installing Python into actual site-packages

On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 03:40:06PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
On Tue, 2003-05-13 at 15:25, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 02:59:05PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
These patches update libxml2/libxslt's python/Makefiles to use the
$(PYTHON_SITE_PACKAGES) value, as discovered by configure, rather than
synthesizing one;  the logic guesses wrong in the case where Python is
not installed under $(libdir).  The patch is against libxml2 2.5.7 and
libxslt 1.0.29.

  Hum, I feel a bit cautious about those patches, basically I'm
afraid that they break on the x86_64 platform, where libdir is
/usr/lib64 IIRC, not /usr/lib , and I cannot break the python
bindings of libxml2, really ... I need to do some tests first.

  I made the test, it passes so I think the patch can be applied.

If I invoke configure using '--with-python', then the Python libraries
ought to be installed into *that* Python's site-packages, no?  At the

  yes, that makes sense. But when you try to get auto*, compilers and
various packaging methodologies on dozens of platforms and processors
to work correctly, common sense has been forgotten way before starting
to run any configuration code.

first, rather than last.  In fact, if you can't ask Python where its
site-packages are, you could probably just bail on doing the Python
wrappers altogether, as your chances of doing the Right Thing (TM) are
just about nil.

  Hum, should I take your comment as an advice to stop working on
doing code and get a degree on applied psychology instead ?


Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit | Rpmfind RPM search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]