Re: [Boost-cmake] 1.40.0.cmake5 (?) builds cleanly

Subject: Re: [Boost-cmake] 1.40.0.cmake5 (?) builds cleanly
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-21 03:24:58

On Monday 21 December 2009 10:53:15 Denis Arnaud wrote:

> 2009/12/21 Vladimir Prus <vladimir_at_[hidden]>
> 
> > IIUC, mpi.so is a Python extension? If so, soname makes little sense for
> > it.
> > Python extensions on my system appear to have or not have soname at random.
> >
> 
> Yes, mpi.so is a Python extension, that is, pulling Python (libpython2.x)
> Boost.Python (libboost_python) as a dependency, and allowing Python programs
> to use Boost libraries. As I understand, it should also pull Boost.MPI
> (libboost_mpi) as a dependency (but in the version I have,
> boost-1.41.0-cmake0, it does not).

Well, if mpi.so does not have a dependency on libboost_mpi, this is a separate
matter from it not having a soname. I still think that not having a soname
is fine, while not having a dependency on libboost_mpi sounds like a bug.
(FOAD, I am obviously not in position to fix that bug)

> Then, the question is: where (in which dedicated directory) should that
> library (mpi.so) be delivered?

Looking at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python I see paths
like:

        /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages

Does it seem like it's gonna work? BTW, 'mpi.so' sounds too generic,
using 'boost_mpi.so' would be better IMO.

- Volodya