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

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 06:50:50PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-05-13 at 16:43, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> >  Actually, your patches apply to the python/Makefile.in which are
> > generated files, could you send a revised version of those for the
> > source files, i.e. the Makefile.am ones ? I can probably try to do
> > it but I would not be garanteed it's what you expected (use
> > ./autogen.sh to regenerate the whole Makefile.in/configure/etc.).
> > A patch for just the Makefile.am should be enough, .in generated
> > ones are not in CVS and recreated from scratch.
>
> Attached are patches for libxml2's python/Makefile.am and libxslt's
> python/Makefile.am.

  Okay, now I remember why I did it that way and what it breaks:
the RPMs I generated used to contains the bindings for all the
installed python version found on the compilation machine, i.e.
at some point I was generating 1.5, 2.1 and 2.2 python bindings
and all of them were available in the libxml2-python or libxslt-python
RPMs. That was done by the code in the spec file with a loop which for each
version found in the system would call make/make install passing
the PYTHON_VERSION as a make command line argument. So I have 3
choices:
   1/ keep as is
   2/ apply your patches and remove the multiple version RPM support
   3/ apply your patches and find another way to generate the multiple
      versions support.
 
 I'm leaning toward 2/ ATM,

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/