[XML-SIG] problem installing pyxml on Vista 64

[Robert Russell]

Thanks for your response.  I did in fact debug further into msvccompiler.py and found that self.__root is never set in the __init_ call for x64 before it's use later on.  Without debugging further, it looks like there may be an issue there.  Anyway, my problem is solved.  We are using the ZSI library and it depends on some xml files that I did not have present.  They are there now and I'm able to run w/out the pyxml module after all.

Kind Regards,
Rob


-----Original Message-----
From: "Martin v. Löwis" [mailto:martin at v.loewis.de] 
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 6:20 AM
To: Robert Russell
Cc: xml-sig at python.org
Subject: Re: [XML-SIG] problem installing pyxml on Vista 64

>   I have a vista 64 bit OS installed with MS visual studio 2003 and
> Active State python 2.5.  I am in need of the pyxml module but the
> installer does not work.  The win installer complains at the beginning
> that python 2.4 is not found in the registry.  (ActiveState 2.5 python
> probably does not populate the registry the same way that stock
> python.org's 2.4 would).

No. It means that you just can't install the binaries into Python 2.5;
they link with python24.dll, and importing it into Python 2.5 would
crash the interpreter.

>   File "C:\Python25\lib\distutils\msvccompiler.py", line 616, in
> get_msvc_paths
> 
>     % (self.__root, self.__version))
> 
> AttributeError: MSVCCompiler instance has no attribute '_MSVCCompiler__root'

Somehow, it didn't manage to find the VS 2003 installation. One would
have to debug that further. Perhaps starting up VS 2003 at least once
might help.

> I think if I install Python 2.4 it is going to collide unfavorably w/ my
> ActiveState instance of python.

There shouldn't be any collision, except for the extension. If you
choose not to associate .py with the Python 2.4 installation, there
will be no collision.

In any case, notice that PyXML is unmaintained. Unless you want to take
over maintainership, I recommend that you port the code to some other
XML library; it might be that it ports really easily to the standard
library.

Regards,
Martin