Re: building/installing Python modules?

Why don't you use the distutils module coming with python ? They provide a platform-independent building/installing mechanism of Python modules and c-extensions. Regards, Christoph

Re: building/installing Python modules?

skip> For example, if I have this chain of dependencies: skip> skip> build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/array.so skip> skip>depends on skip> skip> build/temp.linux-i686-2.3/arraymodule.o skip> skip>which depends on skip> skip> Modules/arraymodule.c skip> skip> (the locati

Re: BTW: This is not the last problem

Adriaan> KDE has a lot of extra meta-files that need to be generated: moc files Adriaan> for Qt, kidl files (and from them _skel.cpp and _stub.h) for DCOP, and Adriaan> _signal.h files for DCOPSignals. These are typically not explicitly listed Adriaan> in the Makefile.am. Instead, we write This

Re: building/installing Python modules?

skip> Sure, if all you want to distribute is a few extension modules. What about skip> if you want to distribute the library they wrap as well? That's where the skip> auto*/libtool gang comes in (I hope - it's difficult enough for me to figure skip> out how this works that I'm still pondering

Re: BTW: This is not the last problem

Adriaan> KDE has a lot of extra meta-files that need to be generated: moc files Adriaan> for Qt, kidl files (and from them _skel.cpp and _stub.h) for DCOP, and Adriaan> _signal.h files for DCOPSignals. These are typically not explicitly listed Adriaan> in the Makefile.am. Instead, we write This

Feature request: meta files & wildcards (once again)

It is common style to generate c/cpp source files from some meta-languages. Examples are lex, yacc, QT's moc, swig, and probably many other tools. AFAIK there is currently no way to handle such files in automake and the recommended way is to write scripts editing Makefile.in's to add seperate r

Antwort: Re: Feature request: meta files & wildcards (once again)

alex> I think the recommended way is to add suffix rules to produce the built alex> sources, not edit the Makefile.ins. But is this really portable ? I looked at automake 1.4 info pages, and it tells something about GNU make: > Handling new file extensions > > > I

Re: Feature request: meta files & wildcards (once again)

alex> Could you check if the automake 1.6.x docs make the same reference to alex> "GNU make" instead of just make when talking about suffix rules? No, they don't. So this is enough if you have a special file type from which source files should be generated. But the moc problem isn't solved (co

spam

Hello, i am going to leave this list because it is not acceptable to receive hundrets of spam mails through [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bye, Christoph

Re: spam

proski> Install a spam filter. I use SpamAssassin. You can download it from proski> http://spamassassin.org/ Not everybody has the possibility to install a filter (i am not the system administrator) proski> Please keep in mind that Automake developers don't have access to the proski> mailing