Python-2.1(Windows) Optional supproject build problems

[Tim Peters]

[David LeBlanc]
> Installation tree - how does that differ from the source tree i'm using?

Exactly how depends on which source tree you're using, although since the
source tarball (.tgz) is a snapshot of the "python/dist/src" portion of the
CVS tree, those source structures are the same except perhaps for leading
path components.  As to how the Windows installation tree differs from those,
look!  For example, there's a DLLs directory in the installation tree but not
in the build tree; the main Python DLL ends up in a system directory in the
installation tree, but ends up under PCbuild in a build tree; etc.

> My binary distribution tree is not the same tree as my source tree.

Yes, but we covered that last time:  the Windows binary installer builds a
tree most suitable for Windows end-users, not Windows developers.  It's
*intentionally* not the same as the source tree.  Indeed, I have to do a lot
of tedious work in the Windows installer build process to *make* it
different.

> One is in Python21 (as it chose), and the source tree is in Python-2.1
> (likewise, as it chose). (Ok, I chose the drive, but the rest was it's
> choice.)

The build process doesn't care what the name of the root is.  As you
discovered before, if you install the source tree into a root directory, then
you'll have to install the "optional packages" thingies into root directories
too, so that they're siblings of PCbuild's parent (and that phrase is used
precisely in order to get away from any dependence in the build process on
the names of PCbuild's ancestor directories).  Where you install it is up to
you, and the build process doesn't care.  It's also up to you whether you
*want* to build the optional components.

The source tree is *best* suited for Unix development, of course, because
many more people compile Python on Unixish boxes than on Windows boxes.  In
some ways, people compiling Python on Windows have a harder time of it, but
not *much* harder; in other ways, an easier time (e.g., you're not going to
find any text in the distro spelling out how to build the optional components
for Linux!).

> WRT the preferred path to install Python sources, i'll keep in mind
> that I'm to somehow magically know that a FAQ on sourceforge gives
> that info.

I told you what I use because that's what I'm most familiar with.  You can
put stuff anywhere you like.

> it's-at-least-unclear-and-was-just-trying-to-help-silly-run-on-
> sentencedly-yours...

Here's an idea:  I'm clearly too close to the Windows build process to really
grasp what you're having trouble with.  To me, *most* of it from the last msg
seemed just to be confusion over what the word "sibling" means when applied
to directories.  If you manage to work through your confusions and can think
of text that would make it clear to the next person, submit a
PCbuild\readme.txt patch to SourceForge and I'll check it in.

> ...
> P.S. WRT to "Guido's too" - thanks, but if I wanted someone else to do
> my thinking for me, i'd be a Pearl user. No disrespect meant to Guido.

Na, that wasn't the point.  The point was that you *should* be charitable
enough to assume that Guido and I build Python successfully on Windows.  If
so, then you could do a lot worse at the start than to copy what we do;
indeed, I believe you're proving you can do a lot worse than that <wink>.

when-you-think-for-yourself-you-get-to-solve-the-problems-you-create-
    for-yourself-too-ly y'rs  - tim