[Distutils] Re: Add multiple frozen modules

[James C. Ahlstrom]

Sigh..., I am back from vacation and as far as I can see, there
are no comments except from Gordon.  And it looks like all I
have managed to do is get Gordon mad at me :-(

But anyway:

Gordon McMillan wrote:
> 
> James C. Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
> > I published a proposed library file format here on distutils
> > and it is described in the doc strings.  But I didn't describe
> > why I didn't use Greg's nor Gordon's format.  Both formats
> > remove the 8-byte .pyc header.  But import.c validates this
> > header for .pyc files and it should be retained.
> 
> Why? So import.c can try to recompile from non-existant source?
> 
> If you let Greg or me build the archive, you'll find that the
> compiles get done if they're needed. Then the package contains a
> python and .pyc's that match that version.
> 
> With or without a check, a mismatch will produce an ugly mess.

I am not saying the myprog.pyl file is created incorrectly nor that
the version does not match python.exe.

The point is that mylib.pyl is a separate file, and so it may be
out of phase with python.exe because the user upgraded python.exe
but not mylib.pyl.

Currently Python will import a file.pyc even if there is no
file.py present.  If that file.pyc has a bad magic number then
Python throws an ImportError.  I think a myprog.pyl file is
exactly analogous.

> 
> > There was no
> > file source information, but a user will want to print out the
> > file names in the library.
> 
> If they want to, the can get the name from the module's __importer__
> attribute. They have everything they need to call archive.contents(),
> too, (if you're letting them get to an interpreter prompt).

I don't understand.  I want to check which files were used to create
myprog.pyl, and this can only be recorded in myprog.pyl.  I don't
want the module names "sub1", I want "C:/path/to/sub1.py".  This could
be used as a check before a product is shipped.  But I guess I can
live without it.
 
> > Greg's format could not be appended to
> > another file.  Gordon can build the library onto another file with a
> > program, but can not append the same file to different programs.
> 
> Um, you mean because there's a "os.remove()" in Builder.py?
> 
> Builder.py is mostly concerned with parsing the config file and
> determining dependencies. The actual archive building is done by the
> archive class, with some utility functions in archivebuilder.py.

My statement stands.  I was hoping to ship myprog.pyl and allow the
recipient to use "cat myprog.pyl >> python.exe" if they wanted.
I know I can re-make a new python2.exe for each system.
 
> I realize you don't like having to have four .py files in the current
> directory. I don't like messing with python internals, especially
> when (among other things) you can use this to distribute a stripped
> down but otherwise standard python.

I agree that changing Python internals is usually bad, and your
design has the very great advantage that no changes are required.

I will throw out my design and re-start using your software.  But
since I have tried this before I know it won't work.  But maybe I
can come up with a more minimal set of changes.
 
> In addition, both Greg & I are hoping (with some encouraging signs)
> that his imputil will attain sanctified status, which would probably
> mean that something like this could be done with just one 'extra'
> file.
> 
> But in the meantime, are you sure you can't get the same effect by
> using normal embedding techniques in the .exe (ie, instead of just
> calling Py_Main?). (Well, not quite normal techniques, since you have
> to use GetProcAddress).

The best I came up with so far is to use freeze to incorporate
my Python files in a DLL, and then use a special main to link in
the frozen modules.  This currently works, but it is not ideal.
 
> > I am going away on vacation tomorrow, so I really hope all
> > this works OK.  I will catch up on all your comments when I
> > get back.
> 
> Have a good time.


Thanks.  I went scuba diving for a week, and then went on a one
week cruise with a large family group in honor of my mother's
80th birthday.  It was great fun!

Jim Ahlstrom