[lxml-dev] install lxml 2.0.5 on Mac OS X Leopard - why is it so hard?

[Kumar McMillan]

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de> wrote:
>  Kumar McMillan wrote:
>  > I don't have experience building native OS X applications
>
>  See? That seems to be a general problem amongst Mac-OS users.

Most people "use" computers they don't build them.  Your work is
greatly appreciated! :)


>  > What is two-level namespacing?
>
>  *shrug*, I prefer an automatic static build on Mac-OS anyway.

me too, I think that would be the right solution.


>  > in fact, that seems to confuse gcc when building
>  > with --static since it produces orphaned -I args (no directory
>  > attached)
>
>  It just disables the requirement for setting the variables. It doesn't
>  configure anything so far. The config has to come from xml2-config and
>  xslt-config.

something is going wrong then with --static because I get "Python.h
not found" errors and the gcc command looked something like this:

gcc ... -I -I/path/to/python/headers

notice the orphaned -I call where, afaict, STATIC_INCLUDE_DIRS was
previously getting inserted.  Just a theory.

>  Hmmm, on Linux, the static libraries are called "libxml2.a" etc. Can you find
>  anything like that on your system?

OK, I dug up some more dirt.  The problem with the macport of libxml2
is that it doesn't build static libraries.  From the port file itself,
I now see: --disable-static, doh!

But, yeah, I think if I build my own with --disable-shared and then
point to that dir as an include this might work.  And I assume I will
probably get a libxml2.a file out of that build.  But is that a
feasible end user solution?  That is, I'm not convinced this will make
great strides in solving the lxml runtime problem where it uses the
wrong version of libxml2 / libxslt.


Kumar