[Community] Rtree installation errors

Howard Butler hobu.inc at gmail.com
Sun Sep 13 05:32:57 EEST 2009

On Sep 12, 2009, at 1:49 PM, Sean Gillies wrote:

> Rtree 0.5, I presume? It seems that the released code was broken. See
> also

libspatialindex_c.so only exists in trunk of libspatialindex.  It has  
not yet been released.  The code was part of 0.5.0, but it was not  
called libspatialindex_c.  To use rtree from trunk, you must also use  
a trunk libspatialindex.  The error below is from this condition.  As  
far as I know, only Brent Pederson and I have been using this so far.

>   http://lists.gispython.org/pipermail/community/2009-August/
> 002162.html
> Please revert to 0.4.3. I'm going to propose that we pull 0.5, do a
> review, more testing and then make a new release.

Except for the PYTHONPATH/egg issue, which is pretty easy to work  
around, the 0.5 passed all of the tests in the test suite.  Why should  
we retract the release, especially for a software called 0.x instead  
of 1.anything?  I bent over backwards to make sure that the new code  
passed all of the tests in the suite and show that we had functional  
parity with what existed before, and telling people to go back,  
especially considering all of the new functionality (with no  
performance degradation), feels like a smack. In the run up to 0.5.0,  
I was clamoring for testing and heard practically nothing.

In the meantime, Brent and I have continued to work on rtree toward a  
0.6 release, which will include sphinx docs, a bunch of performance  
tweaks by Brent, and the movement of the C/C++ code into  
libspatialindex proper.  The holdup is getting a new libspatialindex  
released, and the holdup on that is I have a few more C API items I  
want to implement for libspatialindex_c like tree walking that can  
make it back into Rtree when we get time.

Let's move forward on releases, not backwards.  When it comes time to  
prep for a release, let's ensure that we're testing stuff more  
widely.  0.5.0 might be a little hinky when it comes to installation,  
and 0.6+ is going to require a specific version of libspatialindex  
(and above).  I guess we could start a maintenance branch using 0.4.x,  
but I'm not helping to maintain it.

> On Sep 12, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Ryan Miller wrote:
>> OSError: libspatialindex_c.so: cannot open shared object file: No  
>> such
>> file or directory

More information about the Community mailing list