[vtk-developers] Packaging VTK 4.0 for linux (was Python packages: status, suggestions.)

[David Gobbi]

Hi Prabhu,

It seems that the main problem might be that VTK just isn't well suited
for an RPM.  Perhaps it would be better to focus, at least for now, on
a neat & tidy way to pack the libraries, headers and other bits into a
binary .tar.gz distribution.

 The benefits of this are:

- Relocatability, people untar the package wherever they want.
- A README file can tell them what environment variables to set
  so they can use the .so, .py etc. files in-place.
- An install script can also be provided for people who want to
  put the pieces in the 'right place' on their system i.e. /usr/local
  or some other prefix.

I used to think that an RPM for VTK was the 'right thing to do' but
I'm really not sure anymore.
Because of the size of VTK, and because of the way it is organized,
it just doesn't seem right to try to shoehorn it into an RPM.

Not that I have anything against RPMs!  I just think that a binary
tar.gz package should take priority, because it will provide a more
flexible solution and will also be easier.

>   (3) The python packages are little harder to install.  Since all
>   Python modules of the form libvtkFooPython.so and they link to each
>   other, we have to put these libraries inside a directory which is on
>   ld's search path.  If we do this the python packages wont be able to
>   see them.  One option is to make a link from>
>   CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX/lib/pythonX.Y/site-packages/vtk/lib*Python*.so
>   to the place where they actually are.  What do you think of this
>   approach?

Links are a clean way to do it.

  - David