At 06:04 PM 7/26/2010 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi All,

In addition to the UCS2/4 problems already described by MAL and which I've bumped into myself, I now have a problem with binary linux eggs where the GCC version doesn't match that of the system the egg is being installed on.

Current egg metadata doesn't take either of these into account or even provide a way for the nature of the binary egg to be recorded.

How're people coping with this?
What are the future plans in this area?

Egg binaries aren't a great idea on Linux; they were mainly intended for Windows and Mac, where the architectures are uniform and working compilers aren't just an apt-get or yum away.

(Ironically, this is a side effect of eggs being invented *before* easy_install; if I'd thought of easy_install *first*, I might not've bothered with eggs (as a distribution format) at all. Certainly, sdists don't add a lot of installation overhead except on compiler-less platforms.)

Incidentally, if you look way, way back in the distutils-sig archives, you can see where I first raised the question of platform strings and addressing some of these issues, but at the time nobody was interested. Since then, the topic gets raised periodically, but there has never been anyone with enough of both interest and knowledge to put together a concrete proposal for overhauling platform strings on *nix platforms.

OS/X and Windows, OTOH, have had proposals implemented either in distutils or setuptools over the last few years. (Distutils needs code to *distinguish* platforms (by changing the strings), but setuptools only needs special code to be able to tell when the running platform supports running something built with a different platform string. So, additions of UCS build info to distutils would probably not affect setuptools; addition of gcc info might.)

_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Reply via email to