[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [Patch] Update SWIG support

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2004-11-30 15:57:15 CET

On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 03:42, Branko Čibej wrote:
> John Lenz wrote:
> > <rant>If subversion is using a depreciated feature, then you should
> > notify the SWIG developers.

It was our best understanding that SWIG had adopted a totally insane
position on the support library (that a module had to decide at build
time whether to include the support library functions, and if a program
wanted to use multiple libraries, precisely one of them needed to be
built with the support library enabled, such that it becomes impossible
to distribute binaries of swig-using modules), and that this issue had
already been discussed on the swig list without changing your minds
about it. See http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2004-09/0873.shtml and the
other messages in that thread.

That said, if we all had more time, we would have put more effort into
communicating about this issue. It sounds like the actual situation may
be better than what we understood, perhaps due to a new feature of swig

> > 2) The patch I attach here requires swig 1.3.24, which is not yet
> > released. (Although, we are planning on a release sometime this
> > week). On the other hand, the runtime dependency on swig is
> > completely gone. NO libswigpy is used anymore. After this patch,
> > users of the python bindings do not need swig installed.
> If this patch requires 1.3.24, then sadly we can't use it as it stands
> because there are lots of systems come with older versions.

As John pointed out, we can start treating swig like we treat libtool
and autoconf--a dependency only for those who check out Subversion from
the repository or who make changes to the .i files, not for those who
simply compile it from a tarball.

> Note: I added the -DSWIG_TYPE_TABLE=subversion argument when
> compiling swig generated module files.

I'm a little surprised that this isn't a declaration in the .i files,
rather than a compile-time option. But I don't totally understand all
the issues involved, and I don't think it matters much for us. I don't
think we expect modules from outside the tree to import our .i files.

(Disclaimer: I'm not really a person with a big interests in the
bindings, so I'm not going to be doing any work on this front.)

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 30 15:58:42 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.