[Python-Dev] Install-on-first-use vs. optional extensions (original) (raw)

Moore, Paul Paul.Moore at atosorigin.com
Wed Sep 8 10:21:47 CEST 2004

From: "Martin v. Löwis"

3. Provide another binary that is the "extension server", and install that independently of python.exe, and pythonw.exe. In CVS, I have implemented this approach to see whether it works (it does), and called this binary "launcher.exe". It is a Windows app which supports a -console argument which also makes it a console app. This is the the binary that gets associated with all four extensions, for the "open" verb.

Currently, I'm in favour of using option 3, but I'd like to hear whether people would prefer something else instead.

With option (3), what happens if you run "launcher -console" from a command prompt? Does it produce output in the same console window, or does it launch a new console?

The reason I ask is that cmd.exe uses the association of the .py extension to treat .py files as executable. If the association is to a Windows program, cmd.exe will not wait for the command to finish, but will return a prompt immediately, and the command output will appear in a separate console.

If this is the case, I'm -1 on option (3).

If it's not, I'd like to see how you coded console.exe, as I've often needed this sort of behaviour, and never been able to achieve it correctly!

Paul.

This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list