[sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

Ben Morgan benpmorgan at gmail.com
Tue Jun 9 21:04:13 MST 2009

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs
<dmitrij.ledkov at gmail.com>wrote:

> Keep the same svn. With a little bit of auto-foo magic you can
> generate two different tarballs and release either of them at their
> respective schedules.
> IMHO this should be at least done for the bindings. Because python
> bindings autofoo assumes that the libsword is already installed on the
> system during build-time. This is very hard to satisfy on buildd /
> chroot. On the other hand if bindings were a separate tarball it could
> easily build-depend on libsword such that we (as is packagers) create
> libsword package first and then create bindings package.
> Maybe I'm wrong. In that case could you please suggest how to build
> python bindings when all you have is compiled sword in the current
> directory, or you have libsword installed into $DESTDIR eg. in debian
> case ./debian/libsword/usr/lib/ and other similar paths.

IIRC, you can do --with-sword-dir=$DESTDIR.

As to the case for splitting the bindings off, I'm not sure whether this is
wise or not. BPBible will probably sometime ship with its own bindings (that
way I can do more efficient BPBible-specific filters)

God Bless,
Multitudes, multitudes,
   in the valley of decision!
For the day of the LORD is near
   in the valley of decision.

Giôên 3:14 (ESV)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20090610/74e0f9db/attachment.html>

More information about the sword-devel mailing list