Distutils-SIG May 2000

distutils-sig@python.org

26 participants
56 discussions

Sample setup.py for Numeric Python
by Greg Ward 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

Hi again -- [cc'd to Paul Dubois: you said you weren't following the distutils sig anymore, but this directly concerns NumPy and I'd like to get your input!] here's that sample setup.py for NumPy. See below for discussion (and questions!). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ #!/usr/bin/env python # Setup script example for building the Numeric extension to Python. # This does sucessfully compile all the .dlls. Nothing happens # with the .py files currently. # Move this file to the Numerical directory of the LLNL numpy # distribution and run as: # python numpysetup.py --verbose build_ext # # created 1999/08 Perry Stoll __rcsid__ = "$Id: numpysetup.py,v 1.1 1999/09/12 20:42:48 gward Exp $" from distutils.core import setup setup (name = "numerical", version = "0.01", description = "Numerical Extension to Python", url = "http://www.python.org/sigs/matrix-sig/", ext_modules = [ ( '_numpy', { 'sources' : [ 'Src/_numpymodule.c', 'Src/arrayobject.c', 'Src/ufuncobject.c' ], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file' : 'Src/numpy.def' } ), ( 'multiarray', { 'sources' : ['Src/multiarraymodule.c'], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file': 'Src/multiarray.def' } ), ( 'umath', { 'sources': ['Src/umathmodule.c'], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file' : 'Src/umath.def' } ), ( 'fftpack', { 'sources': ['Src/fftpackmodule.c', 'Src/fftpack.c'], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file' : 'Src/fftpack.def' } ), ( 'lapack_lite', { 'sources' : [ 'Src/lapack_litemodule.c', 'Src/dlapack_lite.c', 'Src/zlapack_lite.c', 'Src/blas_lite.c', 'Src/f2c_lite.c' ], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file' : 'Src/lapack_lite.def' } ), ( 'ranlib', { 'sources': ['Src/ranlibmodule.c', 'Src/ranlib.c', 'Src/com.c', 'Src/linpack.c', ], 'include_dirs' : ['./Include'], 'def_file' : 'Src/ranlib.def' } ), ] ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ First, what d'you think? Too clunky and verbose? Too much information for each extension? I kind of think so, but I'm not sure how to reduce it elegantly. Right now, the internal data structures needed to compile a module are pretty obviously exposed: is this a good thing? Or should there be some more compact form for setup.py that will be expanded later into the full glory we see above? I've already made one small step towards reducing the amount of cruft by factoring 'include_dirs' out and supplying it directly as a parameter to 'setup()'. (But that needs code not in the CVS archive yet, so I've left the sample setup.py the same for now.) The next thing I'd like to do is get that damn "def_file" out of there. To support it in MSVCCompiler, there's already an ugly hack that unnecessarily affects both the UnixCCompiler and CCompiler classes, and I want to get rid of that. (I refer to passing the 'build_info' dictionary into the compiler classes, if you're familiar with the code -- that dictionary is part of the Distutils extension-building system, and should not propagate into the more general compiler classes.) But I don't want to give these weird "def file" things standing on the order of source files, object files, libraries, etc., because they seem to me to be a bizarre artifact of one particular compiler, rather than something present in a wide range of C/C++ compilers. Based on the NumPy model, it seems like there's a not-too-kludgy way to handle this problem. Namely: if building extension "foo": if file "foo.def" found in same directory as "foo.c" add "/def:foo.def" to MSVC command line this will of course require some platform-specific code in the build_ext command class, but I figured that was coming eventually, so why put it off? ;-) To make this hack work with NumPy, one change would be necessary: rename Src/numpy.def to Src/_numpy.def to match Src/_numpy.c, which implements the _numpy module. Would this be too much to ask of NumPy? (Paul?) What about other module distributions that support MSVC++ and thus ship with "def" files? Could they be made to accomodate this scheme? Thanks for your feedback -- Greg -- Greg Ward - software developer gward(a)cnri.reston.va.us Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive voice: +1-703-620-8990 Reston, Virginia, USA 20191-5434 fax: +1-703-620-0913

4 5

Can now compile simple extensions
by Greg Ward 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

Hi all -- at long last, I found the time to hack in the ability to compile extension modules to the Distutils. Mainly, this meant adding a 'build_ext' command which uses a CCompiler instance for all its dirty work. I also had to add a few methods to CCompiler (and, of course, UnixCCompiler) to make this work. And I added a new module, 'spawn', which takes care of running sub-programs more efficiently and robustly (no shell involved) than os.system. That's needed, obviously, so we can run the compiler! If you're in the mood for grubbing over raw source code, then get the latest from CVS or download a current snapshot. See http://www.python.org/sigs/distutils-sig/implementation.html for a link to the code snapshot. I'm still waiting for more subclasses of CCompiler to appear. At the very least, we're going to need MSVCCompiler to build extensions on Windows. Any takers? Also, someone who knows the Mac, and how to run compilers programmatically there, will have to figure out how to write a Mac-specific concrete CCompiler subclass. The spawn module also needs a bit of work to be portable. I suspect that _win32_spawn() (the intended analog to my _posix_spawn()) will be easy to implement, if it even needs to go in a separate function at all. It looks from the Python Library documentation for 1.5.2 that the os.spawnv() function is all we need, but it's a bit hard to figure out just what's needed. Windows wizards, please take a look at the 'spawn()' function and see if you can make it work on Windows. As for actually compiling extensions: well, if you can figure out the build_ext command, go ahead and give it a whirl. It's a bit cryptic right now, since there's no documentation and no example setup.py. (I have a working example at home, but it's not available online.) If you feel up to it, though, see if you can read the code and figure out what's going on. I'm just hoping *I'll* be able to figure out what's going on when I get back from the O'Reilly conference next week... ;-) Enjoy -- Greg -- Greg Ward - software developer gward(a)cnri.reston.va.us Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive voice: +1-703-620-8990 Reston, Virginia, USA 20191-5434 fax: +1-703-620-0913

2 1

Two fixes (at last)
by Greg Ward 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

Hi all -- at long last, I have fixed two problems that a couple people noticed a while ago: * I folded in Amos Latteier's NT patches almost verbatim -- just changed an `os.path.sep == "/"' to `os.name == "posix"' and added some comments bitching about the inadequacy of the current library installation model (I think this is Python's fault, but for now Distutils is slavishly aping the situation in Python 1.5.x) * I fixed the problem whereby running "setup.py install" without doing anything else caused a crash (because 'build' hadn't yet been run). Now, the 'install' command automatically runs 'build' before doing anything; to make this bearable, I added a 'have_run' dictionary to the Distribution class to keep track of which commands have been run. So now not only are command classes singletons, but their 'run' method can only be invoked once -- both restrictions enforced by Distribution. The code is checked into CVS, or you can download a snapshot at http://www.python.org/sigs/distutils-sig/distutils-19990607.tar.gz Hope someone (Amos?) can try the new version under NT. Any takers for Mac OS? BTW, all parties involved in the Great "Where Do We Install Stuff?" Debate should take a good, hard look at the 'set_final_options()' method of the Install class in distutils/install.py; this is where all the policy decisions about where to install files are made. Currently it apes the Python 1.5 situation as closely as I could figure it out. Obviously, this is subject to change -- I just don't know to *what* it will change! Greg -- Greg Ward - software developer gward(a)cnri.reston.va.us Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive voice: +1-703-620-8990 Reston, Virginia, USA 20191-5434 fax: +1-703-620-0913

2 1

Package versioning
by Timothy Docker 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

Hi all, I've been aware that the distutils sig has been simmerring away, but until recently it has not been directly relevant to what I do. I like the look of the proposed api, but have one question. Will this support an installed system that has multiple versions of the same package installed simultaneously? If not, then this would seem to be a significant limitation, especially when dependencies between packages are considered. Assuming it does, then how will this be achieved? I am presently managing this with a messy arrangement of symlinks. A package is installed with its version number in it's name, and a separate directory is created for an application with links from the unversioned package name to the versioned one. Then I just set the pythonpath to this directory. A sample of what the directory looks like is shown below. I'm sure there is a better solution that this, and I'm not sure that this would work under windows anyway (does windows have symlinks?). So, has this SIG considered such versioning issues yet? Cheers, Tim -------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Docker timd(a)macquarie.com.au Quantative Applications Division Macquarie Bank -------------------------------------------------------------- qad16:qad $ ls -l lib/python/ total 110 drwxr-xr-x 2 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:23 1.1 -r--r----- 1 root mts 45172 Sep 1 1998 cdrmodule_0_7_1.so drwxr-xr-x 2 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 chart_1_1 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 Fnorb_0_7_1 dr-xr-x--- 3 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:21 Fnorb_0_8 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 1536 Mar 3 12:45 mts_1_1 dr-xr-x--- 7 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:22 OpenGL_1_5_1 dr-xr-x--- 2 mts mts 1024 Nov 11 11:23 PIL_0_3 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 Pmw_0_7 dr-xr-x--- 2 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:21 v3d_1_1 qad16:qad $ ls -l lib/python/1.1 total 30 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 29 Apr 10 10:43 _glumodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_glumodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 30 Apr 10 10:43 _glutmodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_glutmodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 22 Apr 10 10:43 _imaging.so -> ../PIL_0_3/_imaging.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 36 Apr 10 10:43 _opengl_nummodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_opengl_nummodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 27 Apr 10 10:43 _tkinter.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_tkinter.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 21 Apr 10 10:43 cdrmodule.so -> ../cdrmodule_0_7_1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 12 Apr 10 10:43 chart -> ../chart_1_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 12 Apr 10 10:43 Fnorb -> ../Fnorb_0_8 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 12 Apr 10 10:43 mts -> ../mts_1_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 15 Apr 10 10:43 OpenGL -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 33 Apr 10 10:43 opengltrmodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/opengltrmodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 33 Apr 10 10:43 openglutil_num.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/openglutil_num.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 10 Apr 10 10:43 PIL -> ../PIL_0_3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 10 Apr 10 10:43 Pmw -> ../Pmw_0_7 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 10 Apr 10 10:43 v3d -> ../v3d_1_1

3 2

[Distutils-sig] distutils charter and interscript
by John Skaller 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

3 2

Pondering multi-package packages
by Mark W. Alexander 31 May '00

31 May '00

I apologize of this is documented somewhere. If it is, I haven't found it. I've done lots of python modules, but not any packages, so if I'm just package ignorant feel free to slap me..... It all started in the early Zope days when I loaded Zope only to discover that all my scripts using Marc Lemburg's mxDateTime bombed because Zope's DateTime produced a namespace collision. The solution then was to move Zope, since I didn't 'need' it at the time. Now I do. So, I contacted Marc who, of course, knew about the collision and has already started looking at packaging all his stuff under an umbrella "mx" package. When I asked about Distutils, he hadn't really looked at it so I volunteered to see what it would take. Since Distutils includes a sample mxDateTime setup.py, it seemed fairly easy. I hacked it up to push it down a level (see attempt below). No problem except, of course, that it doesn't import because there's no mx.__init__.py. Ok, so I add an mx.__init__.py with __all__ defined and appropriate imports. Everything's happy and Distutils does fine. Now, I add in mx.TextTools and things get murkier. How does mx.__init__.py determine what __all__ should be and what to import? How do I tell Distutils about the other packages? I tried a single all-purpose Distutils setup.py that searches the mx package directory and adds in the sub-packages that it finds. So far so good. Now, what about mx.__init__.py? Should it: 1) Search it's package directory at runtime to determine what __all__ should be and what subpackages to import? If it does that, then mx.__init__.py will exist in all possible mx packages. Distutils probably won't care and will happily copy the lastest __init__.py into place (since they "should" all be the same, that's not a problem). BUT -- what if I make packages with --bdist-WHATEVER. Package manager WHATEVER is going to not be pleased with multiple packages that all provide mx.__init__.py. Some type of package forcing is going to have to occur for all except the first subpackage installed. - OR - 2) Be created dynamically at "install" time. The all-purpose setup.py can scan when Distutils runs and programatically create an __init__.py at installation time that meets the needs of the currently installed subpacakges. BUT -- that doesn't help when I used --bdist-WHATEVER again, because the resulting package is going to be installed on a system that probably does not have the same set of subpackages installed. I'll have to provide a postinstall script to WHATEVER to create __init__.py on the install host. Do-able, but now I'm manually tacking stuff on to the package that --bdist-WHATEVER can't (unless I missed it) handle. And, mx.__init__.py is not registered to the package somewhat defeating the purpose. It looks like --bdist-WHATEVER needs information about pre- and post-installation processing. This would have to be included in setup.py somewhere. But what should it be? Package managers (that support pre/post install) expect shell scripts. It would be really nice if --bdist took a python function and wrapped it for us in a shell wrapper, e.g. #!/bin/sh python -i <<EOF def postinstall(): ... postinstall EOF So, am I missing something or are these issues real? FWIW, I've included the directory scanning setup.py below. If you try it, it "almost" works for mxDateTime, mxTextTools, and mxNewBuiltins. There's still some issues with mx sub-modules that I'm ignorant of, but they're not related to this discussion. Mark mwa(a)gate.net ############## mx.DateTime setup.py ################ #!/usr/bin/env python import os """ setup.py for Marc-Andr� Lemburg's mx Extension modules Will scan the 'mx' directory for Marc's packages (just DateTime, TextTools, and NewBuiltins so far....) and provide the Distutils infor for all found packages. .""" # created 1999/09/19, Greg Ward # pushed to mx package by Mark Alexander __revision__ = "$Id: mxdatetime_setup.py,v 1.4 2000/03/02 01:49:46 gward Exp $" from distutils.core import setup DateTimePackages=['mx.DateTime', 'mx.DateTime.Examples', 'mx.DateTime.mxDateTime'] DateTimeExtensions=[('mx.DateTime.mxDateTime.mxDateTime', { 'sources': ['mx/DateTime/mxDateTime/mxDateTime.c'], 'include_dirs': ['mxDateTime'], 'macros': [('HAVE_STRFTIME', None), ('HAVE_STRPTIME', None), ('HAVE_TIMEGM', None)], } )] TextToolsPackages=['mx.TextTools','mx.TextTools','mx.TextTools.Constants','mx.TextTools.Examples'] TextToolsExtensions=[('mx.TextTools.mxTextTools.mxTextTools', { 'sources': ['mx/TextTools/mxTextTools/mxTextTools.c'], 'include_dirs': ['mxTextTools'], 'macros': [('HAVE_STRFTIME', None), ('HAVE_STRPTIME', None), ('HAVE_TIMEGM', None)], } )] NewBuiltinsPackages=['mx.NewBuiltins','mx.NewBuiltins.Examples','mx.NewBuiltins.mxTools'] NewBuiltinsExtensions=[('mx.NewBuiltins.mxTools.mxTools', { 'sources': ['mx/NewBuiltins/mxTools/mxTools.c'], 'include_dirs': ['NewBuiltins'], 'macros': [('HAVE_STRFTIME', None), ('HAVE_STRPTIME', None), ('HAVE_TIMEGM', None)], } ), ('mx.NewBuiltins.mxTools.xmap', { 'sources': ['mx/NewBuiltins/mxTools/xmap.c'], 'include_dirs': ['NewBuiltins'], 'macros': [('HAVE_STRFTIME', None), ('HAVE_STRPTIME', None), ('HAVE_TIMEGM', None)], } )] mxPackages=['mx'] mxExtensions=[] if os.path.isdir('mx/DateTime'): mxPackages=mxPackages+DateTimePackages mxExtensions=mxExtensions+DateTimeExtensions if os.path.isdir('mx/TextTools'): mxPackages=mxPackages+TextToolsPackages mxExtensions=mxExtensions+TextToolsExtensions if os.path.isdir('mx/NewBuiltins'): mxPackages=mxPackages+NewBuiltinsPackages mxExtensions=mxExtensions+NewBuiltinsExtensions setup (name = "mxDateTime", version = "1.3.0", description = "", author = "Marc-Andr� Lemburg", author_email = "mal(a)lemburg.com", url = "http://starship.python.net/~lemburg/mxDateTime.html", packages = mxPackages, # XXX user might have to edit the macro definitions here: yuck! # Probably do need to support 'Setup' file or something similar. ext_modules = mxExtensions, )

6 22

bdist broken under Windows
by Thomas Heller 30 May '00

30 May '00

The bdist command in the CVS version is broken under windows. Two problems: 1. It seems the needed directories are not created: . . . self.bdist_dir = build\bdist.win32\dumb self.format = zip changing into 'build\bdist.win32\dumb' error: build\bdist.win32\dumb: No such file or directory 2. This error occurrs only after hacking around the second problem: change_root(), which is not implemented for nt. Having said this, I cannot really understand the purpose of change_root. Finally I tried distutils under Linux, and it seems that change_root converts relative into (nearly) absolute pathnames: usr/lib/python1.5/site-packages/distutils/... This MAY make sense under unix, where python is always(?) installed in the same path, but not under windows! Thomas Heller

2 3

Contemplating upheaval in CCompiler API
by Greg Ward 30 May '00

30 May '00

Hi all (especially to the two [?] of you working on support for additional C/C++ compilers) -- I'm contemplating a major simplification in the CCompiler API that should make life easier for anyone writing or maintaining one of the CCompiler classes, but will raise a lot of dust for a few days. Specifically: currently, each of the compile/link/whatever methods takes a bunch of arguments that enhance instance attributes. For example, every CCompiler instance carries around attributes 'include_dirs', 'libraries', and 'library_dirs'; plus, the 'compile()' method takes an 'include_dirs' parameter, and the 'link_*()' methods all take 'libraries' and 'library_dirs' parameters. These are all combined by convenience functions provided by the CCompiler superclass, so the code overhead to supporting this rather complex interface isn't *too* great. However, I'm getting tired of the *conceptual* overhead: you're forever worrying about "instance attribute 'include_dirs' vs. method argument 'include_dirs'", and so forth. So I'd like to ditch all the extra method parameters and rely on instance attributes as much as possible. That moves CCompiler a little closer to representing a "compiler/linker session", which is meaningless in Unixworld but very much relevant in Macland. (Or so I gather from my spies in that strange and distant country. I'm not clear on the situation in Windowsia, given the constant turmoil in that troubled realm.) I think this is a good thing. The main drawback is that it would make the "build_ext" command a bit more complex. Currently, it sets the instance attributes for compilation properties that apply to all extensions, and passes method arguments for things that vary by extension. (Currently, only 'include_dirs' can do both.) It would have to take care of combining the "global" and "per-extension" properties when it starts to build each extension. This is not, IMHO, a big deal. If nothing else, it would make the signatures and docstrings for the common CCompiler methods a *lot* shorter. Opinions? Greg -- Greg Ward - just another /P(erl|ython)/ hacker gward(a)python.net http://starship.python.net/~gward/ Screw up your courage! You've screwed up everything else.

1 0

bdist and --compiler
by Rene Liebscher 29 May '00

29 May '00

I'm currently working at the Cygwin-Compiler class on Win32, there I found a problem with "bdist". When I have build all extensions with my compiler class and then try to use "bdist", the msvc compiler class starts and fails (I don't have it on my machine.) I think there are two problems. First the system seems to check the filedates with the objectfile-extensions of the standard compiler ( msvc ".obj" , cygwin ".o" ). So it doesn't find my object files, and tries to recreate them, but uses a wrong compiler. I think it should be possible to configure the compiler also for "bdist". (If this is already possible? Please explain how.) Also I think "bdist" does a "build" if there aren't already the right files. In this case "bdist" should accept *all* parameters which "build" accepts. The second problem. Why "bdist" doesn't check only the source files against the finished extension modules? Currently it seems to check the source files against the compiled object files. Then there is something else concerning the compiler option. If the user uses help he get the information that he can use the compiler option, but how can he know which compilers(classes) are available. There should be a possibility to get a list. (In ccompiler.py we have such list, we only had print it.) kind regards Rene Liebscher

4 10

Re: [Distutils] Re: [Python-Dev] Where to install non-code files
by Michael Muller 28 May '00

28 May '00

Greg Ward wrote: [snip] > I have yet to hear howls of my revulsion at my loopy idea of sticking > this: > import sys; sys.path.insert(0, application-python-path) > > into scripts that are installed as part of a "Python application" (ie. > a module distribution whose main interface is a script or scripts, and > that gets its own directory rather than dangling off Python's library > directory). Could it be that people actually think this is a *good* > idea? ;-) [snip] Problem is, the alternatives are equally bad. Ok, playing Devil's advocate: one issue is that if the user (or sysadmin) chooses to move the application directory tree, everything will stop working. Since this also causes problems for uninstall (and probably many other things), the best solution for this problem is *don't do this*. One thing to consider is that the python interpreter automatically prepends the path of the script into sys.path. Therefore, if you install your scripts into the root of your application install directory, you don't need do do any path-mangling. ============================================================================= michaelMuller = mmuller(a)enduden.com | http://www.cloud9.net/~proteus ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth, and the Paths, of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes and many other things which may or may not exist. It is immaterial whether they exist or not. By doing certain things certain results follow. - Aleister Crowley =============================================================================

1 0

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

Distutils-SIG May 2000