Jean,
Did I address your concerns?
John
John Fischer wrote:
> Jean,
>
> Good question.
>
> When doing the build the install line (line 50) will install into the
> proto area for the 32-bit build this will include the etree.so and
> objectify.so libraries. This is not changed. If there were such a
> thing as a partial pkgmk we would be golden. But then the 64-bit build
> would come along and over write the same libraries for the install line
> (line 58) if the proto-64 directory is not used. So we would end up
> with a 64-bit library only within the packaging.
>
> An alternative would be to create a 64-bit directory within the
> proto area. Then do the build and manually copy over the appropriate
> libraries into the new 64-bit directory within the proto area.
>
> A 3rd alternative would be to modify the build within the lxml download
> to build both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions with the same build
> command. I thought that would be undesirable because then we
> would have to port the change each time we upgraded lxml.
>
> I am not married to either the first or the second method of getting
> the libraries into the package. I do not believe the third method
> should be done.
>
> Probably more then you wanted to know but...
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
> jeanm wrote:
>> John,
>>
>> I'm curious about the proto-64 directory. Does this currently exist?
>> Why did you create it and not just have the build put them into the
>> proto/${PROC}/usr/lib/python$(PYTHON_VERS)/site-packages/lxml/64
>> directory in the first place?
>>
>> Jean
>>
>> John Fischer wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> The Python lxml case (PSARC 2009/579) required that there be a 64-bit
>>> version of the shared objects. I filed defect 12535 to track this
>>> issue.
>>>
>>> webrev:
>>>
>>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johnfisc/lxml/
>>>
>>> Open Solaris defect:
>>>
>>> 12535 - lxml need 64-bit version of the shared objects
>>>
>>> The fix is to use the -m64 option for the C compiler within the
>>> Makefile. The one odd thing about the make is that repeated builds
>>> would not complete cleanly because of remaining .so files so I had to
>>> add some code to clean things up within the Makefile. The other part
>>> of the fix is an update to the appropriate prototype files to build
>>> the resulting package.
>>>
>>> When someone has a chance I would appreciate a review.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> John
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> caiman-discuss mailing list
>>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
