On May 8, 2010, at 1:31 AM, Jan Haag wrote: >>> Another issue is that building *for* the system Python 2.5 on OS X 10.5 is >>> a bit difficult (impossible?) to do *on* OS X 10.6 (the SDKs don't work for >>> this). And switching Qt Cocoa/Carbon could be messy. You'd need 4 Macs >>> (or 2 if you can easily switch Qt's) to build the 4 combinations (not >>> counting the oddball 10.4+2.3). >> >> Does Apple ship Python 3 yet? Are developers starting to use it? > It isn't shipped with 10.6 and besides doesn't work at all in 64bit > mode. However, I personally keep a copy around for experimenting... I > don't think there will be a serious demand for it just yet. > Apple won't make major changes in the OS until a major version change anyways. And if 3 isn't 64bit ready yet, with the long lead time in developing the next OS version (they're probably well into it already), I doubt we'll see 3 in OSX 10.7.
>> >> David > > Besides all that, Sun's VirtualBox latest beta versions have > experimental support for MacOS X guests, so one might attempt to use > this to set up a sandbox for the build without using a full hardware mac... > Ooh, that's a neat idea. Then I can upgrade my Mini to Snow, which I've been putting off because of compilation needs ;) (but that'll be hell on Time Machine backups, backing up multi GB disk images) > The only "problem" with that wold be to run through PackageMaker twice > to create the PyQt subpackage for each Python version, then again to > create the metapackages, which can't be automated, as it seems (maybe > with AppleScript, I don't know and I don't know AppleScript, for that > matter...) > Packagemaker has a CLI mode, so it can be automated. ----- William Kyngesburye <kyngchaos*at*kyngchaos*dot*com> http://www.kyngchaos.com/ "Oh, look, I seem to have fallen down a deep, dark hole. Now what does that remind me of? Ah, yes - life." - Marvin _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list [email protected] http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
