[omniORB] Missing idl file in /usr/share/idl/omniORB?

[Thomas Lockhart]

>>>On a related topic: is there a reason why more IDL is not built for 
>>>python in the omniORBpy source tree? Would there be an objection to 
>>>building more of the IDL for the default python installation?
> It's just that nobody has ever bothered to create the make rules for
> it. If you produce a patch, I'll integrate it with the release.

OK, I'm working on building and installing the rest of the IDL for 
omniORBpy. I have something going at least sort-of. I have a few questions:

1) mk/beforeauto.mk has rules which deal with stubs etc. It looks like 
some of it is inherited or reused from omniORB itself (though I haven't 
verified this). Should the files in mk/ stay in sync with the other 
distro, and hence should I focus on modifying rules in python/ instead? 
istm that some of the existing rules are probably not used as-written in 
omniORBpy.

2) There are lots of files and directories generated from the COS IDL. 
Is there a stylistic preference for generating them in-place in python/, 
or instead having a separate subdirectory holding the stub products? In 
the latter case there could be local makefiles or it could just be a 
container for the stubs. There is some mention in the makefiles of a 
$(TOP)/stub/ directory, but it does not seem to be used by omniORBpy (or 
by omniORB). Recommendations?

3) Is there an interest in using python's DistUtils to generate these 
packages rather than doing it explicitly using make? I do have a 
question about setup.py (used by DistUtils) and the apparent necessity 
to have a new __init__.py at the very top level of the installation 
area, which of course does not work when installing into site-packages/ 
or other common areas which already hold files. Anyone have experience 
with this or a suggestion on where to rummage for answers?

                  - Tom