Re: preserve Python directory hierarchy

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hello Baurzhan,

* Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 09:50:25AM CET:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:48:22PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > nodist_ is to avoid distribution, that is, `make dist' putting the file
> > into the tarball.  To avoid installation (which happens with `make
> > install'), replace `python_' (which denotes that this file belongs
> > installed in $(pythondir) with `noinst_'.  Note that noinst_PYTHON files
> > will not be byte-compiled, though.
> 
> Ah. Any way to have compilation, but no distribution?

Not straight-forwardly.

* Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 08:33:32AM CET:
> For now I "find $(DESTDIR) -name \*.py |xargs rm" in install-data-hook.

Ouch.  That won't work if DESTDIR is empty; furthermore, even if you fix
that to be $(DESTDIR)$(pythondir), it will also affect *.py files
installed there that are completely independent of your package.

> One more question: Is there any special reason behind
> 
> 1. install-nobase_pythonPYTHON being called from install-data-am?

You mean, as opposed to install-exec-am?  pythondir is for byte-compiled
but system-independent files, no?  pyexecdir is for system-specific
stuff IIUC, and is populated at 'make install-exec' time.  'info
Automake "The Two Parts of Install"' and "Python" document the naming
scheme.

> 2. Python files being first installed, and then compiled?
> 
> As a naïve user with C background, I'd expect "make" to compile the
> files, "make install" -- to install. This way one could make nodist_
> work, too. What do you think?

Does it work?  I don't know much about python byte-compilation.  Does it
require dependent python files to be available?  Is it specific on the
location in which the files are compiled?

Thanks,
Ralf