Re: some try-ark suggestions

Jonathan:

   Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 14:39:21 +0100
   From: Jonathan Hogg <[email protected]>

   >This is what I have installed:
   >
   >[berto@localhost ark]$ rpm -q python PyXML
   >python-2.0-9mdk
   >PyXML-0.6.5-1

   OK. Where did the PyXML come from? Was it part of the Mandrake install or 
   did you go get it?

Maybe I can let Mandrakesoft off the hook here.  I've poked around, and
it appears (and in accordance with my vague recollection of what I did
several weeks ago) that I grabbed PyXML-0.6.5-2.0.i386.rpm from SourceForge
(http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/sourceforge/pyxml/PyXML-0.6.5-1.i386.html).
I had put this in my /usr/local/src directory and apparently installed
from there.

I just downloaded that RPM from SourceForge anew, and after verifying
identity with the earlier RPM via checksumming, verified too it installs
into /usr/local/lib/python2.0 (and elsewhere), portions into
/usr/local/lib/python2.0/site-packages/_xmlplus in fact.

   This is starting to make some more sense. I suspect that your PyXML 
   install is not being picked up at all. The 'xml' package you're picking 
   up is the basic one included in Python 2. This takes me back to my 
   earlier question about where the PyXML rpm came from.

That's what I'm seeing:

[root@localhost python2.0]# ls -ld /usr/lib/python2.0/xml
drwxr-xr-x    5 root     root         4096 May 20 12:21 /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/

This resulted from the base Mandrake 8.0 install.

   I'm not familiar with the Mandrake distribution, but I found the python 
   rpm you have (python-2.0-9mdk) on rpmfind.net. Listing the contents I get:

   $ python -qlp python-2.0-9mdk.i586.rpm
   /etc/emacs/site-start.d/python.el
   /usr/bin/python
   /usr/lib/python2.0
   [...]
   /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/__init__.py
   /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/__init__.pyc
   /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/__init__.pyo
   /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/dom
   /usr/lib/python2.0/xml/dom/__init__.py
   [...]

   I also found an rpm named like yours (PyXML-0.6.5-1.i386.rpm) which 
   contains:

   $ rpm -qlp PyXML-0.6.5-1.i386.rpm
   /usr/local/bin/xmlproc_parse
   /usr/local/bin/xmlproc_val
   /usr/local/lib/python2.0/site-packages/_xmlplus/__init__.py
   [...]

Yes, all in apparent conformity with my current setup.

I now see a /usr/local/bin/python -> /usr/bin/python link date-stamped
at the time of my first try-ark attempt.  My vague recollection is that
the attempted PyXML-0.6.5-2.0.i386.rpm installation balked at not finding
/usr/local/bin/python, so I just linked to the Mandrake-installed python.

Perhaps this is all a mess of my own making.

   However, note that this rpm installs into /usr/*local*/lib not /usr/lib 
   which is where your Python appears to be installed.

   I tried downloading the latest rpm from pyxml.sourceforge.net 
   (PyXML-0.6.5-2.0.i386.rpm) and it also installs into /usr/local/lib.

Yup.

   Now I don't know of any standard Linux distribution that ships with 
   Python in /usr/local, so I don't know what the package maintainers for 
   the PyXML project are playing at.

I wouldn't have a clue.

   First off, if you can try the 'rpm -ql python PyXML' stuff as above and 
   see if I'm right. If this is how your machine came after installing 
   Mandrake 8.0 I'd have a shout at them. If you got PyXML from sourceforge, 
   then I guess we should be asking them why they're using a non-standard 
   (for Linux anyway) location for python.

I don't know enough as to be so bold to ask them (the PyXML developers).

Mandrakesoft appears now to be falsely suspected/accused.

   In the short term, I'm not sure what to suggest. You could try (and it's 
   an ugly solution) ditching your /usr/lib/python2.0/xml directory and 
   linking it to the /usr/local/lib/python2.0/xml one.

Except I don't have a /usr/local/lib/python2.0/xml, rather
/usr/local/lib/python2.0/site-package/_xmlplus.

   >I know it will be hard, but you should try to discern and code around some
   >least common denominator.  It would be a pity, wouldn't it, if you force
   >would-be users to become Python and XML experts in addition to mastering
   >Arusha itself?  Or if you tell users of a quite recent Linux distribution
   >to have to seek out later-versioned Python (or ...) RPMS and install them.

   Yes, this is a bit of a mess. I've not looked closely at the XML stuff 
   that comes with Python 2 (Will?), but perhaps we should try to accomodate 
   that as well as Python >=1.5 + PyXML.

Would autoconf help at all here?

How about a core packages verification utility that diagnosed the user's
setup and reported something like "Sorry, but no way any of this is going
to work, because your installation is non-standard/broken in the following
way..."?

(For what it's worth:  Harlan has coded the PIKT autoconf to locate and
configure in paths for certain required binaries, e.g., ps.  Because you
might build the PIKT binaries on one Solaris system, say, but install those
binaries onto a different Solaris system with ps (or other binaries) in a
different location (it could happen), I have the PIKT binaries check for
the existence of the required external programs and give a clear error
message if they are not found.  I suppose you are doing that in a way
with your Python traceback dumps, but they're intimidating to the clueless.
Another vague recollection, I think that discussion of this has appeared
in this forum before, and it was decided to leave the tracebacks in as is,
not to filter or reinterpret them, while Arusha is still in this early
alpha state.  No?)

Thanks for hand holding me through this.

More later on your attempted code fix.

Berto

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Osterlund, Unix Systems Manager                [email protected]
Grad School of Business, U of Chicago                       phone: 773/702-8898
1101 E. 58th Street, #309, Chicago, IL 60637, USA             fax: 773/702-0233