[Pythonmac-SIG] py2app unable to find cprocessors.so

[Michael McCracken]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Paul Wiseman <poalman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 September 2012 20:16, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Michael McCracken
>> <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > FWIW, here's how I do something similar now, to avoid having many
>> > copies of the Qt libraries.
>>
>> cool! Thanks for the description
>>
>> > There is one master app, and several sub-apps.
>> >
>> > * call setup() for each of the apps, generating full separate apps
>> > with copies of the Qt libraries and other stuff
>> > -- each call has a unique directory sent in the setup options
>> > "bdist_base" and "dist_dir". This avoids sharing build state, as
>> > mentioned earlier in the thread. This seems to work fine, calling
>> > setup() multiple times in the same script.
>>
>> good to know -- I think the OP was right, the conflict over the
>> sharing build dirs -- I didn't know you could override that.
>>
>> > * inside main app Contents/Resources, create empty sub.app/ directory
>> > * for each sub app:
>> > ** copy sub.app/Contents/MacOS into
>> > main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/MacOS
>> > ** copy sub.app/Contents/Info.plist into
>> > main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/Info.plist
>> > ** copy everything in sub.app/Contents/Resources/ that isn't include
>> > or lib into main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/Resources/
>> > ** create symlinks for sub.app/Contents/Resources/include ->
>> > main.app/Contents/Resources/include (do the same with Resources/lib)
>>
>> OK -- here is where I"m confused -- with a sylink, you can do either
>> relative or absoute path, yes? absolute wouldn't work, as who knows
>> where the user will install it -- but relative could, as long as the
>> users keeps them all together -- is that how you handle it?
>>
>> Alternatively I suppose you could require that main.app be installed
>> in /Library/Frameworks or something, and then symlink to the absolute
>> path.
>>
>> I actually kind of like that idea, 'cause it would keep the apps a bit
>> more distinct, -- I have a base I want to use with multiple apps but
>> don't necessarily want folks to have to install everything at once to
>> use one.
>
>
> You could create the multiple apps at run time when running the main app,
> that's not too far away from what I'm doing at the moment.  I think it's
> mainly just a few xml plist files that cant be symlinked because they wont
> be the same as the main app. A slightly easier solution would be to zip the
> apps up and drop them in place and relatively symlink the needed parts back
> to the main app.

Yep, this could probably be made to work, but would break code
signatures on any apps that you changed in that way - just something
to keep in mind.