[Python-Dev] Re: [Pydotorg] updated notes about building bsddb185 module (original) (raw)

Skip Montanaro skip@pobox.com
Fri, 2 May 2003 19:11:53 -0500 

Skip> I suppose that's an alternative, however, it is complicated by a
Skip> couple issues:
Skip> 
Skip> * The bsddb185 module would have to be built as bsddb (not a big
Skip>   deal in and of itself).

Martin> Why is that? I propose to build the bsddb185 module as
Martin> bsddb185. It does not support being built as bsddb[module].

Skip> * The current bsddb package directory would have to be renamed or
Skip>   not installed to avoid name clashes.

Martin> I suggest no such thing, and I agree that this would not be
Martin> desirable.

My apologies, Martin. I guess I misunderstood what you suggested. (I suspect Nick Vargish may have as well.) My interpretation of his complaint is that he doesn't have a functioning bsddb module and wants the old module back. He wants to be able to install Python and have "bsddb" be the module. As currently constituted, I think Modules/bsddbmodule.c can only be built as "bsddb185" because of the symbols in the file. How can Nick build that as "bsddb"? Furthermore, how can you guarantee that the bsddb package directory won't be found before the bsddb module during a module search (short, perhaps of statically linking the module into the interpreter)?

Skip