> At 09:13 AM 7/19/2007 +1000, Mark Hammond wrote: > >Its not clear from your reply, but do you believe that all > architectures > >having identical filenames is a problem? If so, how do you > think we should > >approach it?
I'm still not sure what the answer to the question is though :) > > Mostly, I'm just interested in understanding how to update > setuptools' platform API functions: > > http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/PkgResources#platform-utilities That sounds worthwhile - but I'm unsure why we wouldn't simply update distutils in similar ways, and then have setuptools borrow that implementation, especially if the requirements are similar - which they seem to be. Does setuptools have unique requirements in this regard, or is there some other reason I'm missing why we can't kill multiple birds with a single stone? I assume that 'distutils' is still the 'officially preferred' way of building extensions? Or maybe distutils used directly really is considered dead, so I'm wasting my time even discussing changes to distutils itself? I'm really just trying to make it simple for the next person trying to build for 64bit Windows platforms (I've got a build - it just uses lots of hacks that may not be obvious to others), but I'm no longer sure what we expect this next person to be using when they build their extensions... Mark _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
