Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Fedora Core 5 x86_64 lib install problems

[Greg Troxel]

Eric Blossom <address@hidden> writes:

> I *really* suggest that you guys sort this out properly and generate a
> patch that fixes it.  Otherwise this kludge is going to get
> propagated.  You really don't want to be copying files around by hand.
> It definitely will lead to problems down the road.
>
> I believe the problematic difference is between the definitions for
> python script directory:
>
> SuSE 9.3 Pro
>
> checking for python script directory... 
> ${prefix}/lib64/python2.4/site-packages
> checking for python extension module directory... 
> ${exec_prefix}/lib64/python2.4/site-packages
>
> FC5
>
> checking for python script directory... ${prefix}/lib/python2.4/site-packages
> checking for python extension module directory... 
> ${exec_prefix}/lib64/python2.4/site-packages

> checking for Python include path... /usr/include/python2.4
> checking Python.h usability... yes
> checking Python.h presence... yes
> checking for Python.h... yes
>
> That answer is produced by the AM_PATH_PYTHON .m4 macro that is used
> on the system.  You can find the definition being used by examing
> gnuradio-core/aclocal.m4.

Given the "lib64" approach, I'd say that Suse is correct in using
lib64, because

1) site-packages contains binary libraries on my system, so it should
   be versioned for 32/64 (on systems which support both and treat
   64-bit binaries as alternative).  E.g.:

/usr/pkg/lib/python2.4/site-packages/_curses.so: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, 
Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for NetBSD 3.0, not stripped

2) Presumably the point of lib64 is that programs/libraries compiled
   for 32 bits can be installed to lib.  So someone should be able to
   install GNU Radio libs in 32-bit mode as well, and if lib is used
   there will be a conflict.



-- 
    Greg Troxel <address@hidden>

pgpu1Jr1L8h3u.pgp
Description: PGP signature