If you build the bsddb module on a Unix-like system (that is, you use
configure and setup.py to build the interpreter and it attempts to build the
bsddb module), please give the new patch attached to
http://python.org/sf/553108
a try. Ignore the subject of the patch. I just tacked my patch onto this
item and assigned it to myself. If/when the issue is settled I'll track
down and close other patches and bug reports related to building the bsddb
module.
Briefly, it attempts the following:
1. Makes it inconvenient (though certainly not impossible) to build/link
with version 1 of the Berkeley DB library by commenting out the
relevant part of the db_try_this dictionary in setup.py.
2. Links the search for a DB library and corresponding include files so
you don't find a version 2 include file and a version 3 library (for
example).
3. Attempts to do the same for the dbm module when it decides to link with
the Berkeley DB library for compatibility (this is stuff under
"development" and will almost certainly require further changes). (You
can ignore the debug print I forgot to remove before creating the
patch. ;-)
I asked on c.l.py about where people have the Berkeley DB stuff installed so
I could tune the locations listed in db_try_this, but the thread almost
immediately went off into the weeds arguing about berkdb license issues. I
therefore humbly request your more rational input on this topic. If you
have a Unix-ish system and Berkeley DB is installed somewhere not listed in
the db_try_this dictionary in setup.py, please let me know.
Thx,
Skip
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4