Re: [Numpy-discussion] Happy New Year Nummies -- and some discussion about the future

[Tony S. <ant...@ie...>]

On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Paul F. Dubois wrote:

> A millenium-end report from the Head Nummie (this name is a joke; see the
> DEVELOPERS file):
> 
> There have been a steady set of messages on the subject of I should do this
> or that to make it easier to make RPMs.  It is impossible for me to act on
> these: I don't know much about RPMs, and if I did, I don't know if making
> the change suggested is good or bad for someone doing something else, like
> making Windows installers. Therefore my policy is to rely on the Distutils
> people to work this out. Those who wish to make it easier to make a binary
> installer for platform xyz should figure out what would be required by the
> Distutils bdist family of commands.
> 
> That is not to say that I don't appreciate people trying to help. I'm
> grateful for all the support I get from the community. I think that relying
> on division of labor in this case is the right thing to do, so that we take
> advantage of the Distutils effort. If I'm wrong, I'll listen.
> 

The problem that I pointed out is not a problem with building a binary
package.  Invoking './setup_all.py build' on a clean machine does not work.
The numpy core is built, but the packages are not.  The reason is that all
of the packages are looking for 'Numeric/arrayobject.h' which does not exist
until the numpy core has been installed at least once.  Even then, the
packages will use an old version of arrayobject.h.

I see two solutions:
 1) Have the setup script make a symbolic link in the package's include
 directory to the include directory of the numpy core.  Call the symbolic
 link 'Numeric.'
 
 2) Move the include files for the core to a subdirectory called 'Numeric.'

I would prefer the first solution, but I'm not aware of a way for the
non-unix versions of python to create a link to a directory.

<snip>

Tony