Build bugs in Python 2.2.1?

Martin v. Loewis martin at
Sun Aug 11 19:39:13 CEST 2002

Jonathan Hogg <jonathan at> writes:

> I consider removing the UNIX-specific magic from *would* be an
> improvement.

That might be the case - it depends on the precise details on how this
change is implemented.

> An improvement for me would be being able to do:
>     % CFLAGS=... LDFLAGS=... \
>       ./configure --with-ssl-dir=... --with-dbm-dir=...
> and have everything compiled with consistent compiler flags and have the
> corresponding modules compiled against the specified libraries.

You have to be more precise than that. How exactly do you expect the
setting of CFLAGS and LDFLAGS to be used? Completely ignoring them
throughout would also be "consistent".

In anycase, on the matter of LDFLAGS, please review

and add any comments you have to this report.

I doubt many people would consider the addition of tons of --with-
flags as an improvement.

> I don't see another clean way to communicate such build information from
> configure to than via Modules/Setup.conf.

configure could (and does) record things in Makefile.pre.


More information about the Python-list mailing list