Build bugs in Python 2.2.1?

Martin v. Löwis loewis at informatik.hu-berlin.de
Mon Aug 12 09:29:39 CEST 2002


DIG <dig.list at telkel.net> writes:

[using autoconf for building modules]
> > Please understand that this option has been explicitly considered, and
> > has been rejected in favour of a distutils-based build approach.
>
> It would be much more understandable, if you explicitly told us why
> this option has been considered, but rejected ...

distutils and autoconf are largely overlapping for building extension
modules. distutils has the advantage of

a) being able to record the dependencies between files, and
b) requiring only Python and the C compiler to build extensions.

I believe people also think that

c) Python code is better readable and maintainable than autoconf
   source code, and
d) for the things that you need to determine when building extension
   modules, autoconf is no big help.

Furthermore,

e) there is no inherent magic in autoconf that could not be provided
   in a Python library (i.e. distutils).

HTH,
Martin




More information about the Python-list mailing list