>> That's incorrect. Distutils is not a make substitute and I doubt it
>> ever will be. What dependency checking it does do is incomplete and
>> this gives rise to problems that are reported fairly frequently.
Martin> Can you provide a specific example to support this criticism?
Martin> Could you also explain how generating makefiles would help?
>From python-list on June 10 (this is what made me wish yet again for better
dependency checking):
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2002-June/108153.html
It's clear nobody but me wants this, though I find it hard to believe most
of you haven't been burned in the past the same way the above poster was.
Frequently, after executing "cvs up" I see almost all of the Python core
rebuild because some commonly used header file was modified, yet find that
distutils rebuilds nothing. If a header file is modified which causes most
of Objects and Python to be rebuilt, but nothing in Modules is rebuilt, I'm
immediately suspicious.
Here's a simple test you can perform at home. Build Python. Touch
Include/Python.h. Run make again. Notice how the core files are all
rebuilt but no modules are. Touch Modules/dbmmodule.c (or something else
that builds). Run make again.
I'm simply going to stop worrying about it and just keep deleting all the
stuff distutils builds to make sure I get correct shared libraries.
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