Hello Baurzhan, * Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:50:25AM CET: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:48:22PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > nodist_ is to avoid distribution, that is, `make dist' putting the file > > into the tarball. To avoid installation (which happens with `make > > install'), replace `python_' (which denotes that this file belongs > > installed in $(pythondir) with `noinst_'. Note that noinst_PYTHON files > > will not be byte-compiled, though. > > Ah. Any way to have compilation, but no distribution?
Not straight-forwardly. * Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 08:33:32AM CET: > For now I "find $(DESTDIR) -name \*.py |xargs rm" in install-data-hook. Ouch. That won't work if DESTDIR is empty; furthermore, even if you fix that to be $(DESTDIR)$(pythondir), it will also affect *.py files installed there that are completely independent of your package. > One more question: Is there any special reason behind > > 1. install-nobase_pythonPYTHON being called from install-data-am? You mean, as opposed to install-exec-am? pythondir is for byte-compiled but system-independent files, no? pyexecdir is for system-specific stuff IIUC, and is populated at 'make install-exec' time. 'info Automake "The Two Parts of Install"' and "Python" document the naming scheme. > 2. Python files being first installed, and then compiled? > > As a naïve user with C background, I'd expect "make" to compile the > files, "make install" -- to install. This way one could make nodist_ > work, too. What do you think? Does it work? I don't know much about python byte-compilation. Does it require dependent python files to be available? Is it specific on the location in which the files are compiled? Thanks, Ralf
