Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
–
Regards,
Konstantin
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev annulen@yandex.ru wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” tim.vandermeersch@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro.
I know, but can’t set ENABLE_PYTHON=OFF for OB and ENABLE_PYTHON=ON for Avogadro in superpackage since it’s one variable
Need and idea what to change in CMakeLists.txt without total changing of variable names
The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Яндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” tim.vandermeersch@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.
I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Яндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
2010/4/21 Konstantin Tokarev annulen@yandex.ru:
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” tim.vandermeersch@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
I see, not sure what the best solution is… We could rename one to
AVO_ENABLE_PYTHON…
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
21.04.10, 20:09, “Tim Vandermeersch” tim.vandermeersch@gmail.com:
2010/4/21 Konstantin Tokarev :
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
I see, not sure what the best solution is… We could rename one to
AVO_ENABLE_PYTHON…
It’s not a good solution - ENABLE_PYTHON is used in very many places, both CMake files and #defines in sources
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Здесь спама нет http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
22.04.10, 18:00, “Konstantin Tokarev” annulen@yandex.ru:
21.04.10, 20:09, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
2010/4/21 Konstantin Tokarev :
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
I see, not sure what the best solution is… We could rename one to
AVO_ENABLE_PYTHON…It’s not a good solution - ENABLE_PYTHON is used in very many places, both CMake files and #defines in sources
But fortunately it’s almost unused in OB! I’ve rename it to OB_ENABLE_PYTHON, is it ok?
Also I see, that this variable adds ‘scripts’ directory, so maybe it’s more correct to call it ENABLE_SCRIPTS?
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Яндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
2010/4/22 Konstantin Tokarev annulen@yandex.ru:
22.04.10, 18:00, “Konstantin Tokarev” annulen@yandex.ru:
21.04.10, 20:09, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
2010/4/21 Konstantin Tokarev :
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
I see, not sure what the best solution is… We could rename one to
AVO_ENABLE_PYTHON…It’s not a good solution - ENABLE_PYTHON is used in very many places, both CMake files and #defines in sources
But fortunately it’s almost unused in OB! I’ve rename it to OB_ENABLE_PYTHON, is it ok?
Also I see, that this variable adds ‘scripts’ directory, so maybe it’s more correct to call it ENABLE_SCRIPTS?
OB has several bindings. How about simply PYTHON_BINDINGS?
(PERL_BINDINGS, CSHARP_BINDINGS, JAVA_BINDINGS, etc. to come soon)
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
OpenBabel-Devel mailing list
OpenBabel-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
openbabel-devel List Signup and Options
22.04.10, 15:18, “Noel O’Boyle” baoilleach@gmail.com:
2010/4/22 Konstantin Tokarev :
22.04.10, 18:00, “Konstantin Tokarev” :
21.04.10, 20:09, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
2010/4/21 Konstantin Tokarev :
21.04.10, 19:58, “Tim Vandermeersch” :
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Currently, OB and Avogadro use the same variable ENABLE_PYTHON. Is it possible to build Avogadro with Python and don’t build Python binding of OB without significant changes in build systems?
You don’t need the OB python bindings for compiling Avogadro. The is a
minimal amount of code allowing you to get an OBMol from an Avogadro
Molecule but that code doesn’t require OB python bindings at compile
time.I’d gladly built OB with Python, but it doesn’t compile with 2.6.5, and 2.4 doesn’t work for Avo.
I see, not sure what the best solution is… We could rename one to
AVO_ENABLE_PYTHON…It’s not a good solution - ENABLE_PYTHON is used in very many places, both CMake files and #defines in sources
But fortunately it’s almost unused in OB! I’ve rename it to OB_ENABLE_PYTHON, is it ok?
Also I see, that this variable adds ‘scripts’ directory, so maybe it’s more correct to call it ENABLE_SCRIPTS?OB has several bindings. How about simply PYTHON_BINDINGS?
(PERL_BINDINGS, CSHARP_BINDINGS, JAVA_BINDINGS, etc. to come soon)
OK. Everything except ENABLE_PYTHON goes 
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
–
Regards,
KonstantinЯндекс.Почта. Письма есть. Спама - нет. http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign
OpenBabel-Devel mailing list
OpenBabel-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
openbabel-devel List Signup and Options
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Здесь спама нет http://mail.yandex.ru/nospam/sign