I'd like to know what everyone's take on the best way to build python extensions for both python2 and python3 when the upstream build system can only build for one at time.
The path I took for the gpsd update I submitted was to use two independent source trees, then build one for python2 and another for python3. But of course if the software is much more than just the python extensions, it is rebuilding a lot of the same code, with the same result. This could be considered a bit wasteful of CPU and disk space, and certainly increases build time. The only other option I could come up with would be to build for python2, install that, and then within the install section, reconfigure with python3 and rebuild (which should hopefully only rebuild the python related parts), and finally install again with the python3 configured setup. One pitfall I see with this method is the potential need to manually clean out certain python2 based generated files if the reconfigure isn't enough. Plus this results in building in the install section, which seems a little bit off. IMHO the first option is better. Sure, it wastes some CPU cycles and disk space, as well as increases package build time. However, it seems less prone to needing manual tweaks, provides a much cleaner distinction between the two build configs, and would make it easier to enable/disable the two variants as desired. But that is just my opinion, I'm curious what the Python SIG consensus is. Troy
_______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
