[Patches] [ python-Patches-467650 ] Add some --without-* options to setup.py

[noreply@sourceforge.net]

Patches item #467650, was opened at 2001-10-03 14:58
You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=467650&group_id=5470

Category: Build
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Greg Ward (gward)
Assigned to: A.M. Kuchling (akuchling)
Summary: Add some --without-* options to setup.py

Initial Comment:
setup.py is a little too brittle in that it hardcodes 
paths like /usr/local, /usr/local/ssl/lib, etc.  It 
also tends to assume that if a libssl.a exists in the 
filesystem, it can be linked against.

If /usr/local is broken, incomplete, incompatible, or 
what-have-you, this can really screw things up.  In 
the absence of the right solution (finish my 
autoconf-in-python implementation), this patch is a 
band-aid fix.  It adds --without-usrlocal and 
--without-ssl options to the custom build_ext command 
used in Python's setup.py.  detect_modules() respects 
these options in a fairly obvious way.

Andrew, I'm assigning this to you because you wrote 
this setup script in the first place.  Don't check it 
in yet; I'm going to bring this up on python-dev and 
see what everyone things.  There are a other ways to 
do this.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Greg Ward (gward)
Date: 2001-11-03 11:04

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=14422

Martin von Loewis really didn't like this idea:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-October/017746.html

In retrospect, I think he's right.  I also think that
hardcoding /usr/local into setup.py is sub-optimal, but
fixing it right would be a lot of work.  Sigh.

Editing Modules/Setup.local now seems to work for me, so I
think this patch can safely be refused.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: A.M. Kuchling (akuchling)
Date: 2001-11-02 13:51

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=11375

Greg, did you get any reactions to this patch?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=467650&group_id=5470