Re: [matplotlib-devel] autoconf+python

[Michael D. <md...@st...>]

On 01/07/2013 12:24 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Thomas Kluyver <th...@kl... 
> <mailto:th...@kl...>> wrote:
>
>     On 7 January 2013 16:57, Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...
>     <mailto:ben...@ou...>> wrote:
>
>         I was just reading some comments from Richard Stallman on ./
>         when I noticed that he pointed out a useful autoconf feature
>         that was added somewhat recently.  Essentially, this feature
>         would allow one to do a build/install of a python module using
>         the "./configure; make install" approach, if one chooses. 
>         Maybe it should be something to consider adding to our build
>         system?
>
>
>     My 2 cents: I took over the maintenance of a Python project built
>     by autotools. The build system felt more complex than the actual
>     application - a fantastic world of .am files generating .in files
>     generating Makefiles, which themselves were packed with
>     abstractions. I had little idea how to change anything in the
>     build process, and before long I ripped it out in favour of
>     setup.py, despite all distutils' flaws.
>
>     I'm sure that's more a question of my experience than of
>     autotools, but I'd think twice before adding it to a project.
>
>     Best wishes,
>     Thomas
>
>
> That's a very good point.  I certainly don't want to add significant 
> complexity to our build system.  We certainly have enough of it 
> as-is.  I was hoping that there was a way to complement our setup.py 
> approach.  In other words, "python setup.py install" would be our 
> primary means of build/install, while allowing for "make install" as 
> an alternative.  I have yet to actually look into how this current 
> autoconf feature would work and if that is even possible.

I, also, am not too much up on the details --- but I think if it's 
possible for "make install" to just call "python setup.py install" under 
the hood, I'd have no objections.  What I'd be wary of would be 
maintaining multiple install scripts.  It's hard enough keeping one up 
to date with all of the various platforms and configurations we 
support.  I'd be happy to replace that one with something that's clearly 
superior, however, but distutils, bad as it is, seems to be "good enough".

Mike