[Python-Dev] Packaging and binary distributions for Python 3.3 (original) (raw)

Vinay Sajip vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Oct 16 22:49:41 CEST 2011

Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan gmail.com> writes:

Compilation can be a problem on Linux systems as well, so a platform neutral format is a better idea. Just have a mechanism that allows pysetup to create a bdistmsi from a bdistsimple. Similar, bdistrpm and bdistdeb plugins could be taught to interpret bdistsimple.

I agree that a platform-neutral format is a good idea, but there might be other complications with binary formats, which I'm not sure we've considered. For example, if we're just bundling self-contained C extensions which just link to libc/msvcrt, that's one thing. But what if those extensions link to particular versions of other libraries? Are those referenced binaries supposed to be bundled in the archive, too? I don't know that the dependency language supported by packaging extends to these kinds of dependencies on external, non-Python components. If we leave it to the packager to include all relevant binary dependencies, I'm not sure how satisfactory that'll be - possibly, not very.

Regards,

Vinay Sajip

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list