[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] python-pybind: new package

[Guillaume Bres]

Asaf, Thomas,

Well, only when you wrote that I noticed the package is named
> python-pybind on Buildroot, but the real package name is actually
> pybind11. So yes, I think it should be changed to python-pybind11.


I proposed a patch to rename pybind11 so a potential cmake support in the
future
with $(eval(cmake-package)) does not face problems.
The C++11 check is not needed until we make the package a cmake package,
I prefered to push only the name changes at the moment, we will look into
the cmake thing afterwards

Thomas,
I will revise the patch I have in standby once this package has been
effectively renamed, it needs its dependency
to 'host-python-pybind' updated

Guillaume W. Bres
Software engineer
<guillaume.bressaix at gmail.com>


Le ven. 12 juin 2020 à 16:55, Asaf Kahlon <asafka7 at gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:43 AM Guillaume Bres
> <guillaume.bressaix at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > If I understand correctly, this patch only covers the first use case
> (C++/Python). I only added this one because my following patch requires
> host-python-pybind, but I agree it certainly lacks a depends on
> !BR2_INSTALL_LIBSTDCPP. I'll wait for people's point of view before going
> any further anyway. If you agree on this, I will add the dependency and
> push a v2
> >
> This patch includes only the installation of pybind11 to the target -
> which isn't worth much since it includes only headers. It should be
> installed to the staging dir instead. As far as I understand, there's
> no point in installing this package to the target at all.
> In addition, pay attention you don't only need C++, but at least C++11.
>
> > The other use case that people might need in the future, is not allowed
> at the moment until we unlock it with $(eval $(cmake-package)) but requires
> further work (I am also not familiar with cmake at the moment). Maybe you
> could proceed with adding the cmake support because you are knowledgeable
> and already got it working?
> >
> Actually, the cmake part is already implemented in the patch I sent in
> the previous mail. Feel free to take any parts you need from it.
>
> > One last question though: "For example, this project won't find pybind11
> because it uses find_package(pybind11...)", so we should rename the package
> to python-pybind11? so we don't have any other problems when unlocking the
> cmake option. If you agree on that point, my v2 will be renamed to
> python-pybind11 & and I will also adapt my following work to this new name
> >
> Well, only when you wrote that I noticed the package is named
> python-pybind on Buildroot, but the real package name is actually
> pybind11. So yes, I think it should be changed to python-pybind11.
>
> > Guillaume W. Bres
> > Software engineer
> > <guillaume.bressaix at gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > Le jeu. 11 juin 2020 à 20:14, Asaf Kahlon <asafka7 at gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I'm not sure pybind11 is just a "regular" python package.
> >> First, it needs C++11 so we have to make sure the toolchain supports
> >> that in order to be able to actually compile the generated pybind11
> >> code.
> >> Secondly, the installation through setup.py just installs the pybind11
> >> headers and it doesn't give any way for C++ projects to locate the
> >> package. For example, this project won't find pybind11 because it uses
> >> find_package(pybind11...) in it's CMakeLists.txt:
> >> https://github.com/pybind/pybind11_json. The installation of pybind11
> >> using CMake gives a solution to this problem.
> >>
> >> Those considerations have been taken into account in a previous patch
> >> I sent to the mailing list few weeks ago:
> >>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20200513183903.8656-1-asafka7@gmail.com/
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Asaf.
> Best regards,
> Asaf.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20200612/c920eee5/attachment-0002.html>