[XML-SIG] Availability of libxml2 and libxslt Python bindings

Daniel Veillard veillard@redhat.com
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 06:00:06 -0500

On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 11:43:26AM +0100, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > > Seriously, I think that Fred's second proposal (combining
> > > the Python wrapper modules, rather than the libs) solves
> > > this best. And it should work on all platforms and with all
> > > Python versions.
> > 
> >   Except it seems to break my existing packaging model. Though
> > not cast in stone I really would not like to change the RPM mapping
> > too much. But I'm not sure I have looked at all the facet of Fred's
> > proposal and how to actually build the stuff that way, so I will
> > still try to get it working.
> Ideal would be if you'd factor out the Python bindings completely.
> Then you'd have three packages libxml2, libxslt and python-libxml.

  Well this does not match my setup and existing packaging:
     - the CVS trees, libxslt and libxml2 are in separate areas, each
       with a python dedicated subtree
     - the python binding testing are part of my regression tests
       I also use the python binding to make some regression tests
       of the libxml2 conformance, so decoupling those would IMHO
       be a step back.
     - the release schedules of libxml2 and libxslt are not tied,
       though I usually roll them simultaneously it's not a rule.
     - it should be possible to install the libxml2 python bindings
       without installing the libxslt package, I dislike the idea of
       putting a requirement in that direction.

> The advantage of this approach is that you can then use setup.py
> to build the Python binding and also combine the two bindings
> into one (shouldn't be too hard, since you are generating
> the wrappers anyway, I figure).

  95% of them are generated, yes, based on API description files
themselves generated in the libxml2/libxslt build.

> >   Microsoft packaging is anyway a domain I can't touch, I really don't
> > have such a box and don't intend to in the foreseable future, though I
> > usually take portability patches gracefully !
> With distutils you get this for free !

  How does distutils tell me that the libxml2/libxslt libraries where
compiled with Cygwin versus MSC on the Windows platform ? The linking
conventions seems to require that information and going through the doc
of distutils I could not find anything about it.


Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@redhat.com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/