Build bugs in Python 2.2.1?

[Martin v. Loewis]

"Donn Cave" <donn at drizzle.com> writes:

> Well, that's sure encouraging!  All of this is probably true, but
> had the same attitude hovered over the move to setup.py in 2.1,
> we'd still be using autoconfig, right?

Which attitude are you referring to? I don't think I can follow your
reasoning.

> I'm not the biggest fan of setup.py, but I don't think it needs
> to be a choice between setup.py and autoconfig.  There are all
> kinds of ways to get information from configure into setup.py,
> and all we need is to find one that might be ideologically
> acceptable to the folks who check stuff in.

Reliance on autoconf can only work on systems where configure is run,
which in turn require systems that have a /bin/sh. If setup.py needs
to do things which it currently cannot do, distutils must be enhanced
to allows these things to be done.

Regards,
Martin