On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:55:03PM +0100, Jeremy Sanders wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Mihai Ibanescu wrote: > > >I believe you can get away without patching anything, if you do: > > > >from distutils import sysconfig > >print sysconfig.get_python_lib() > > > >to which you either pass plat_specific = 0 or 1. This will properly > >parse the right Makefile (which is probably what you ended up doing). > > The problem is that this doesn't find the Makefile if you use the > unpatched distutils on Fedora on x86_64. Fedora patches distutils to look > in lib64. The unpatched distutils looks in lib, and never finds it.
Sorry if I missed it from previous e-mails. Why don't you use Fedora's patched distutils then? :-) > It would be nice if Python knew where its Makefile was. Python does, if it's in the standard location. /usr/lib64 was not necessarily something that worked well for Python, at least not from the very beginning, and that's because there is a prefix and an exec_prefix, and then an unpatched python will just slap a lib after that. If multilib were developed to use a totally different prefix than /usr (like /usr64), it would definitely have been easier. That, or I am missing the obvious fixes :-) Misa _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
