python 2.3.3 setup.py: why adding sys.prefix to include_dir, libdir? ['LBBW': checked]

[Holger Joukl]

I am restricted to using Lotus Notes right now, so I try to make my
comments
recognizable with ###

> ...
> I understand the --prefix=PREFIX sets the installation _target_
directory.
> Does it make sense to have these paths in include_dirs/library_dirs? Why
> would I want this?

Well, to work completely out of the box setup.py would need to be
telepathic, omniscient and be able to see into the future.  We're
working on that <wink>, but not there yet.

So I wouldn't regard having to hand-hack setup.py as being in
particularly bad taste.

### Nothing against hand-hacking, but I still cannot see it makes sense to
have
### my target installation directoris put into library_dirs/include_dirs.
### Only reason might be the assumption that the target dirs are where
### anything relevant for building python lives, aside from the hardwired
### /usr/... and /usr/local/...

> In fact, as it turned out that I had some bogus header files in the
> PREFIX directory, an extension module would not compile.

Well, might I suggest not installing broken headers on your system?  I
mean, I can think of real reasons for not wanting $(prefix) on the
search path, but not this one.

### You are right there, but then this was just a silly way to detect
### s.th. that seems strange (to me) anyway ;-). I also have to correct
### myself, as it is not the header but the accompanying shared libs.

> 2. As a lot of things do not live in the "standard" places in our
> environment,

What is your environment, out of curiosity?

### SunOS dev-b 5.6 Generic_105181-30 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-250
### We are generally using a nfs python installation which does not live
### in /usr/local. In preparation for moving from 1.5.2 to 2.3.3,
### I am installing to a different (local) dir tree for testing purposes;
this
### is where the conflicting libs where found (=PREFIX, my configure
### target dir).

> there seem to be several places where I have to change setup.py
> manually. E.g. adding runtime library dirs for curses, gdbm etc.  Is
> there another way to achieve correct build, in terms of telling my
> non-standard paths to configure in the first place?

Er, no, or at least not in general.  Editing Modules/Setup is another
option...

> Just to spare me from changing setup.py...

... as is submitting patches to SF that make setup.py look in these
places, if they are in fact "standard" for your environment but not
for, say, Red Hat Linux.

### As said, the paths are non-standard platform-wise; just wondered if
### there is a way to say "use these custom paths instead of the standard
### paths to build".

###Thanks,
###  Holger

Der Inhalt dieser E-Mail ist vertraulich. Falls Sie nicht der angegebene
Empfänger sind oder falls diese E-Mail irrtümlich an Sie adressiert wurde,
verständigen Sie bitte den Absender sofort und löschen Sie die E-Mail
sodann. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Übermittlung sind nicht
gestattet. Die Sicherheit von Übermittlungen per E-Mail kann nicht
garantiert werden. Falls Sie eine Bestätigung wünschen, fordern Sie bitte
den Inhalt der E-Mail als Hardcopy an.

The contents of this  e-mail are confidential. If you are not the named
addressee or if this transmission has been addressed to you in error,
please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.  Any
unauthorized copying and transmission is forbidden. E-Mail transmission
cannot be guaranteed to be secure. If verification is required, please
request a hard copy version.