[Tres Seaver, 2009-11-16] > >> Values could be things like "libxslt", "libpng", etc.. > > > > Am I right in understanding this as informational field only ? > > Yes. The primary consumers will be OS packagers, who will map them onto > their own package names. As with other metadata they care about, we > hope that the packagers will suggest packages to make these names > "uniform" acrrss Python distributions. I imagine there will be some > jockeying among them to find the "common" name for such things, which > they will then need to map.
How about putting there what we (distro maintainers) can pass to ctypes.util.find_library()? It would be great if there would be another field for build dependencies, though. F.e. enchant extension required enchant headers to build enchant.so (so libenchant-dev package was required at build stage), but now it uses ctypes only and enchant.h is not needed at all. Previously I used ldd (or dpkg-shlibdeps to be exact) to get runtime dependencies from .so extension (so once I figured out the right build dependencies, runtime dependencies were generated automatically), now I use: from ctypes.util import find_library; print find_library("enchant") to generate right depenencies, but I had to read the sources to figure out what to pass to find_library. -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig