I have personally not built Python myself (though I've built many an extension), but what I can say is that I got the idea from Larry Hastings. According to him (this if for the Gilectomy fork):
"Second, as you hack on the Gilectomy you may break your "python" executable rather badly. This is of course expected. However, the python Makefile itself depends on having a working local python interpreter, so when you break that you often break your build too." 2017-09-30 19:59 GMT-05:00 Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io>: > > > On Sep 30, 2017, at 3:52 PM, xoviat <xov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't think CPython needs to bundle all of its build-time dependencies. > That principle doesn't really apply to other Python programs nor most other > programs in general. AFAIK, CPython already has a build-time dependency on > another, external, Python, so it wouldn't be too much to require the > external Python to have setuptools installed with something like > pyproject.toml (other programming languages usually bootstrap themselves > with previous versions of the language along with some associated build > tools). > > > As far as I can tell, CPython does *not* have a build time dependency on > having Python available. I just spun up a bare alpine linux container and > compiled CPython `master` branch on it. As far as I can tell the only > Python that exists in this container is the one I just compiled. > > That means that in order for CPython to depend on distutils to build as > you indicate, it would also need to start depending on an existing version > of Python being available. I don’t think that’s a great idea. I think > Python should not depend on Python to build. >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
