From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-26 23:15:24
Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Thanks to Steve, Bernd, and Josselin for ideas.
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 09:17:24PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Decorate only the shared library names with the python versions, and retain
>> the current names for the .a files and .so symlinks - with two separate -dev
>> packages that conflict with one another?
>> That still prevents anyone from packaging an extension that builds for both
>> python2.4 and python2.5 at once using Boost.Python, but I think it solves
>> all the other drawbacks of the other solutions you suggested.
> Indeed. Do you think this is a serious restriction? Given that
> Debian likes to package extensions for all python versions, I tend to
> think it will become a problem.
extensions for different python installations don't conflict because
they end up in separate directories. Python's own runtime library does a
similar thing: it is installed in <prefix>/lib/python<version>/config.
What if boost.python gets installed into that directory, too ? Wouldn't
this solve the issue ?
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk