On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, Bill Janssen wrote:
I also just released JCC 1.9 to cheeseshop [2] with this and many other fixes since release 1.8:
I was able to build 1.9 (shared) for Windows XP, Python 2.5, after installing setuptools. I've now got bdist packages for that configuration; I believe you will need setuptools to install them on a target machine, though. Would it be useful for me to put them somewhere so others could download them?
As I've done before for other user-built binaries, if you make them available somewhere for the world to download, I'll put up a link to the message announcing them on the PyLucene homepage. You can put any information specific to your binaries in that message.
I believe the references to the location of Java (and the particular micro-release of Java being used) are still hard-coded into the JCC libraries, so perhaps not. It would be easy (I've got the code) to teach JCC to look in the registry to find Java, but when you build PyLucene with JCC, is the location of libjava hard-coded into that PyLucene binary?
On Linux and Solaris, the location of runtime libraries is hardcoded into the binaries produced if you've chosen to do so by using the -R or -rpath linker flag. This is recommended as having better security than setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Whether you choose to hardcode the location or not, you can override it with LD_LIBRARY_PATH (I think ?).
On Mac OS X, the location of Java is determined by the OS. Java is a pre-installed system framework.
On Windows, I don't think this can be hardcoded at all (I think ?) and the Java binaries are found by the PATH. You have shown before that PATH can be changed at runtime _before_ these libraries are loaded. I don't hardcode any such PATH setting into JCC anywhere. It's up to you to do this whichever way works best for your situation (registry trick or otherwise).
Andi.. _______________________________________________ pylucene-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
