dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Jansson <johanjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 08:50:55AM -0500, Anders Logg wrote:

...

> Very good!
> 
> Now that the Python interface is becoming more useful, maybe we should
> promote it with a better position in the source tree?
> 
> I suggest we put it in one of
> 
>   src/pydolfin
>   src/swig
> 
> instead of
>  
>   dolfin  src/demo/scripting/pydolfin/
> 

Ok, "src/pydolfin" seems to be the natural choice.

> It should also be installed in the usual place where Python packages
> get installed during 'make install'. The test examples could still be
> under src/demo. This could wait until after the next release.
> 
> Another question we've discussed previously: should we keep the
> current system where 'make' does a fake install in $toplevel or should
> it be necessary to to a 'make install' before doing 'make demo'?
> 
> The advantage would be that we could simplify the build system: Faheem
> Mitha reported some problems with the fake install not being cleaned
> during a 'make clean', and we could remove all the
> 
>     '../../../dolfin-config --cflags'
> 
> stuff in the demo Makefiles. The disadvantage would be that it would
> introduce one extra step to run the demos.
> 
> /Anders
> 

The current variant does have an advantage in that it's much easier to
test the demos (if you can't do a system install at least). On the
other hand, having a Debian package would give a similar benefit.

Perhaps it's a good idea to remove the fake install approach and
instead focus on generating and distributing a Debian package?

  Johan