| 1 |
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:57:05 +0100 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On the other hand, we would introduce a tiny bit of additional code. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I did a bit research on the topic, and the code introduced is circa 100 |
| 7 |
lines, including docs and esetuppy() which would be probably added |
| 8 |
anyway. There are other potential problems however. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The main issue is how distutils is designed. The only command accepting |
| 11 |
build-dir is the 'build' command. Other commands which need to access |
| 12 |
the build tree just use some weird method of getting parameters for |
| 13 |
other commands. Effectively, if you need to provide a build-dir, you |
| 14 |
always have to run 'build'. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
So, the install command would grow from: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
./setup.py install ... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
to: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
./setup.py build -b ... install ... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Of course, all other commands accessing the build-dir would need to |
| 25 |
be prepended with the 'build -b ...' as well. For that reason, |
| 26 |
the patches I'm going to attach add that thing to esetuppy() directly. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
This has the following implications: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
1) all calls to esetuppy() involve running build, |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
2) if build takes additional arguments, they may need to be passed |
| 33 |
consistently to all esetuppy calls (like: 'build --foo' in args). |
| 34 |
Otherwise, a rebuild with different options may happen (but that's |
| 35 |
probably a case already anyway). |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
In any case, I wouldn't say it's very elegant of Python. It will work |
| 38 |
flawlessly for the most of Python packages, and likely most |
| 39 |
of the remaining ones would require running in-source builds anyway |
| 40 |
(and that can be enabled with a single variable). |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Well, best just look at the code and tell me what you think. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Best regards, |
| 46 |
Michał Górny |
Archives