Artem Egorkine wrote: > A number of people have reported that they have had problems building > the bindings. I have two ideas to bounce around: > > 1. Would it make sense to distribute SWIG-generated pyfprint_swig.c > together with the sources? This way, we get rid of a build-time > dependency on SWIG. The configure process can still check for SWIG > and, if found, force regeneration of pyfprint_swig.c...
That sounds like a good idea, at least to ship pyfprint_swig.c in the tarballs. I'm not so sure about checking it in to the repo. Let's see what Daniel says. > 2. Would it make sense to use setup_tools to build the extension with > 'python setup.py build_ext --inplace' like the SWIG documentation > strongly recommends? If someone does it, sure. I had enough trouble just to get Autotools working. I have never used setup_tools. /Lukas _______________________________________________ fprint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.reactivated.net/mailman/listinfo/fprint
