Am Sonntag, 10. März 2013 schrieb Cyril Roelandt: > On 03/07/2013 11:38 PM, Andreas Enge wrote: > > I am attaching the resulting patch. Is it reasonable to apply it to > > the libxml2 package, or would it be preferable to create a separate > > libxml2- python package? > I'm not sure it is a good idea to automatically install bindings along > with the library, so I'd rather have a package per binding.
I would rather say "one tarball, one package". But this case is borderline: The python bindings are not installed automatically, but need an additonal "python setup.py" step in a subdirectory, which even compiles a shared library. And they can be downloaded in a separate tarball. Are there any other opinions? So far, I modified the existing package to also install the bindings, but they could easily be split out. > On an unrelated note, the PYTHONPATH envrionment variable must be > adjusted in order to use the library, since it is not installed in a > "standard" location, but I guess there is not much we can do about it. Yes, I needed to add (setenv "PYTHONPATH" (string-append libxml2 "/lib/python2.7/site- packages")) as well as in some other place (setenv "PERL5LIB" (string-append perl-xml-parser "/lib/perl5/site_perl")) This had better be handled centrally. One could do it in the same way as CPATH currently, but Ludovic had some ideas how to generalise it even further. I added a "FIXME" comment in the build recipe. Andreas
