I tried a Makefile based build of python (+ some module) in the past for
Android (and macos):
https://bitbucket.org/cavallo71/android
There was no particular problem in dropping autoconfigure+setup.py in the process: the only real problem was the pgen must be
compiled on the host machine (but that could have changed since).
In general python was a plain compile and link stuff with not much magic involved and that is (very) good in my opinion: magic
detection tends to fail, autoconfigure need to "execute" stuff to detect things (reason why is quite useless in cross-compile
mode) etc.
I would've tried also cmake and qmake builds as well, but simply I didn't have
time to spend on it.
I hope this helps,
Antonio
Zachary Ware wrote:
On Saturday, January 24, 2015, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org
<mailto:br...@python.org>> wrote:
On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 5:45:28 PM Gregory P. Smith <g...@krypto.org
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','g...@krypto.org');>> wrote:
On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 11:20:02 AM M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','m...@egenix.com');>> wrote:
On 23.01.2015 19:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 01/23/2015 06:30 PM, Cyd Haselton wrote:
>> Related to my earlier question regarding building Python on
Android
>> and an undefined reference to dlopen error...I have the
following
>> question: Is it possible to build and install Python without
having
>> to build and install...or use...distutils?
>>
>> Some background:
>> I can build the python interpreter on my device, and I can
build a
>> bunch of modules. The problem appears when make reaches the
part
>> where setup.py is used to build and import
modules...specifically when
>> setup.py attempts to import distutils.core.
>
> you can do this using Setup.local. This works for me building
additional
> extensions as builtins. It might require some tweaking to build
everything.
You may want to have a look at the Setup files we're using
in eGenix PyRun, which uses them to force static builds of the
various built-in extensions.
Look for these files:
PyRun/Runtime/Setup.PyRun-2.7
PyRun/Runtime/Setup.PyRun-3.4
in the source archives:
http://www.egenix.com/__products/python/PyRun/
<http://www.egenix.com/products/python/PyRun/>
> Otoh, I would like to get rid off the setup.py altogether (/me
ducks ...).
Why ? It's great for finding stuff on your system and configuring
everything without user intervention (well, most of the time :-)).
Because our setup.py is a nightmare of arbitrary code run in a linear
fashion with ad-hoc checks for things that are
unlike how any other project on the planet determines what is available on your
system. It may have seemed "great" when
it was created in 2001. It really shows its age now.
It defeats build parallelism and dependency declaration.
It also prevents cross compilation.
Building an interpreter with a limited standard library on your build
host so that you can run said interpreter to have
it drive the remainder of your build is way more self hosting that we
rightfully need to be for CPython.
So are you suggesting to add the build rules to configure and the Makefile
-- and Windows build file -- in order to drop
setup.py?
Windows already doesn't use setup.py. There are a lot more modules built-in on
Windows, and others have their own project files;
distutils isn't used at all.
--
Sent from Gmail Mobile
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/a.cavallo%40cavallinux.eu
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
