> The README should provide sufficient information, although if you want > to install Python into /usr rather than /usr/local (as I believe is the > default), you need to run configure as follows: > > ./configure --prefix=/usr >
Yeah, I saw that in the readme. > > In fact, it's /usr/bin/python, /usr/bin/python2.3, /usr/lib64/python2.3 > and /usr/lib/python, since Red Hat hasn't decided to capitalise the > name of the software. ;-) > ok you got me, type-o .... > The configured Makefile together with the various other tools should > work out where to put the libraries. I'm a newcomer to x86-64, although > I've had some relatively recent experience with sparc64, and whilst I'm > not really familiar with the way the various tools choose the install > directory of libraries, I've noticed that sometimes 64-bit libraries > end up in lib rather than lib64. Meanwhile, I notice that the Red Hat > libraries do adhere correctly to the expectation that 32-bit libraries > are found under /usr/lib/python2.3 and 64-bit libraries are found under > /usr/lib64/python2.3. > > Perhaps you should configure and make Python, then run the install > process in "pretend" mode: > > make -n altinstall > > You'll get a huge amount of output, but this should at least tell you > what the installation process is thinking of doing, and it won't be > overwriting anything important while it does so. > ok, so where does that leave me. I'm not even sure which files *should* be put in /lib64 vs lib. >>> I guess what I'm expecting is a congifure option to specify where architecture dependent files should be put. <<< Has anyone else mentioned this before? Respectfully, Christopher Taylor -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
