[Pythonmac-SIG] best way to install packages?

[Bob Ippolito]

On Feb 3, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:

> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>> You're really confused here.
>
> Yes, I know. I was hoping for some clarification. Let me try it  
> this way:
>
> I am running OS-X 10.4
>
> I need Python >= 2.4.1
>
> I *need* to build packages that will run on my machine, and I can give
> binaries to others running 10.4. I can also give them whatever
> pre-requisites they need, as long as there is )or I can make) and easy
> installer for it (like a python2.4.1 mpkg, for instance)
>
> I also need to build stand-alone apps with Py2app that will run on  
> 10.4
>
> While I'm at it I'd *like* to build binaries that I can contribute to
> the community and put up on pythonmac.org.
>
> Which python should I use? Which gcc should I use when I build stuff?

There are only two Python distributions to choose from today:
	Python 2.4.1(for PPC)
	ActivePython 2.4.2 (for PPC)

For all intents and purposes, they're the same and will cover all  
your purposes.  Python 2.4.1 ships readline, but you will want to  
install TigerPython24Fix.  ActivePython 2.4.2 does not ship readline,  
but I believe it already has a patched header.

In the near future, there will be a Python 2.4.2 (with a LOT of  
patching) that is built fat, which will build extensions that work  
natively on i386 or ppc.  Such a distribution is not available  
today.  That distribution will only be compatible with GCC4 (so maybe  
Fortran users will have to do some major tweaking.. not sure if it's  
relevant to anything else).

Unless you manually did something, GCC4 will be the default compiler  
for everything.  This is fine.  The only downside to GCC4 that I'm  
aware of is that some code might not be compatible with it (VERY  
unlikely) and that the binaries it produces have no chance at all on  
working on versions of Mac OS X prior to 10.3.9 (where gcc-3.3  
produces binaries that "might" work on older versions of the OS).

>>> I may want to stick with a python built for 10.3, if for no other
>>> reason that to get wxPython working as easily as possible.
>>
>> That's totally backwards...
>
> How is that? Robin provided binaries built for both 2.3 and 2.4 for  
> OS-X
> 10.3, but not for 10.4, so I think that means I need to use the python
> built for 10.3.

No, it doesn't... And that's not surprising because there isn't a  
readily available binary distribution of Python that was built on 10.4!

> In addition, there is a thread in this group right now about trouble
> building wxPython on 10.4

And I'm pretty sure I answered that with the reason and the fix,  
which has been available since the day 10.4.0 was released, if not a  
day or two earlier....

-bob