Mark Hammond schrieb: > The pywin32 extensions require (well, prefer) administrative access during > installation - certain files are copied to the System32 directory and the > registry at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE is written to. Also, if I understand > correctly, if Python happened to be installed into "\Program Files", admin > access would be required to create any files in that directory tree - I'm > not sure what permissions the \PythonXX directory are created with, but its > not unreasable to assume that some shops might choose to secure that > directory similarly to "\Program Files". [...]
> So I see a few alternatives, but none are very desirable: I have not yet even used vista, so I fear I cannot answer your questions, or even offer an opinion... > * Only make this "admin required" check if a specific version of Python is > necessary (ie, the package contains extension modules). This would leave > pure-python packages out in the cold. > > * Live with the ugly UI that would result in performing that check after the > Python version has been selected, and add the command-line processing > necessary to make this work. This sound like the most universal option to me. > * Ignore the issue and try to educate people that they must explicitly use > "Run as Administrator" for such packages on Vista. What if the user does not have or cannot get admin rights? Can he not install the package then? > I'm wondering if anyone has any opinions or thoughts on how we should handle > this? bdist_wininst has its own problems anyway - most severe the MSVC runtime dll issue. Another one is that it won't work for 64-bit installations. bdist_msi solves the 64-bit and MSVCRT issue. I would expect that it also solves the UAC problems. OTOH it is not possible (AFAIK) to build bdist_msi installers on Linux systems. Thomas _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
