On 08/19/2011 03:34 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * IOhannes zmölnig <zmoelnig@iem.at>, 2011-08-19, 11:30:
>>> pyassimp.errors.AssimpError: assimp library not found
>>
>> hmm, it worked for me...:-(
>> trying to find words to ask you how and what, i think i found the
>> reason: pyassimp looks for /usr/lib/libassimp.so which is only
>> provided by libassimp-dev (which i most likely had installed when
>> testing)
>> since the findmechanism in pyassimp for dlopen() is rather simplistic,
>> i guess this is the reason why it fails.
>>
>> thanks for pointing that out.
>
> Yeah, the whole search_library() function could be replaced by a simple:
>
> return ctypes.cdll.LoadLibrary('libassimp.so.2')
>
> (Well, modulo support for non-UNIX-y operating systems.)
yes, i came up with something equivalent (though not checked in yet),
but also using
ctypes.util.find_library('assimp')
to resolve "libassimp.so.2" dynamically.
since i am no python programmer, i wonder whether this is portable (w32,
osx)
>
>>> Also, why did it print stuff on stdout? :/
>>
>> ask upstream :-)
>
> ...
no, seriously.
>
>> Q: as a packager, am i supposed to fix such things?
>
> At least your are supposed to forward bug reports upstream. (Of course,
> your sponsor might choose not to upload the package until a bug that is
> particularly severe/annoying is fixed.)
sure, but how does this apply here?
the python module prints something to stdout when used. is this a bug?
what are the guidelines to decide whether i should "fix" a given
behaviour that will not do any harm? (right, i can easily think of an
example where the behaviour could be problematic. but then i could also
think of such things for many other applications and that does not
neccessarily make them all buggy)
fgmasdr
IOhannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature