On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 8:36 AM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn > <da...@student.matnat.uio.no> wrote: >> Kurt Smith wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn >>> <da...@student.matnat.uio.no> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Not that I really know anything about it, but note that one of the >>>> purposes of David's toydist is to handle the install stage independently >>>> of the build system used. That is, it is able to create e.g. Python eggs >>>> without using setuptools. >>>> >>>> The thing is, installing Python software is something of a mess, and >>>> every system would want this done differently (making an Ubuntu package, >>>> creating a DMG, or creating a Python egg are all different things). So I >>>> think it makes sense to decouple this from the build in the tools that >>>> are used. >>>> >>> >>> Yep. Good points. I expect once I get the configure/build stages in >>> a working state, I'll have most of what people need. The install >>> stage is less crucial, at least for the first version. Seems like >>> people would like the system to just create a .so file in the current >>> directory, and leave it at that. If I can get that working on all >>> platforms I'll be very happy :-) >>> >>> >>>> Of course, toydist is beta, and I dare say you have enough beta >>>> dependencies for fwrap already :-) >>>> >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> Hopefully that can be remedied that in the coming months, at least >>> from the fparser and memoryview-support-in-Cython side of things. >>> >> >> Obviously I didn't get around to that yet... >> >> As for the build systems, some things to consider (I have no clue myself >> as to waf vs. scons): >> - There's already primitive scons support for Cython, but I'm sure it >> wouldn't be hard to add to waf >> - Whatever you pick is likely to become the best supported build system >> for Cython code in the future, I think, due to our interest in working on it >> - Does waf have infrastructure for parsing files and finding >> dependencies? I know that in Scons one can plug in a "Cython parser", >> which checks the dependencies (which pxds are used, basically), so that >> pyx files are rebuilt automatically when pxds they depend on change. I'm >> sure waf supports something similar, if not I'd say it disqualifies it. >> >> My own hunch is that waf looks better, but scons has a larger mind share >> and Cython support right now in scientific Python, and that both must be >> supported eventually, so why not do scons first... *shrug* >> >> But like you I'm anxious to hear from more non-Cython devs as well on >> this matter. >> >> Dag Sverre >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org >> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> > > >From a very brief look at the waf book, I don't really understand what > the cross-platform capabilities of waf are > > http://freehackers.org/~tnagy/wafbook/single.html : > "Installing Waf on a system is unnecessary and discouraged: "
The main waf author claims that waf should never be installed, and always included with your package. I think it makes sense for a lot of practical cases (and that's how autotools work, mostly: autoconf/automake are not needed when building something from sources, because you have a gianting shell script called configure). I know there has been some effort toward better windows support for waf - given that waf is written in python, it is hard to see a architectural reason why waf could not work well on windows. But build tools depend a lot spawning processes and the likes both efficiently and reliably, and that's one of the area where windows and unix-like systems are fundamentally different. David _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
