McMillan Installer vs. Python 2.4

[mrmakent at cox.net]

I've done further research, and now have McMillan Installer working for
Python 2.4, so I'd like to share what I found.

First, I got the latest Installer, 6a2, from the Vaults of Parnassus.
This version is listed as the 'Windows' version.  This means two
things:  The .py files are sprinkled with DOS-style line endings
(CR/LF) and file endings (^Z), and the runtime support files for Linux
are not prebuilt.

First, you must strip the DOS stuff out of some of the files.  The ones
I did that solved various syntax errors was rthooks.dat and
_mountzlib.py.  Why only these files, I don't know.

Second, you must go to the support subdirectory and do 'python Make.py'
followed by 'make'.  This builds the proper runtime support stuff.

Once I did this, Installer worked with Python 2.4 like a champ.  This
gives me the single-file executable I need (NOTE: I do not mean a
single file that I can use to install my app on the target platform, I
mean that my app is a single, executable file.)  And with the use of
the '--upx' option, Installer runs upx on my executable, creating a
compressed, self-executing file.

This takes care of the management roadblock of "Your script is only a
couple K in length, but you turn in into an executable and it takes HOW
MANY meg?!!?  Well, Python is obviously too inefficient for our use."

At least, on some platforms.  Sadly, no upx on our main delivery
platform, which is AIX.  Does anyone know of a better executable-packer
for AIX than gzexe?