>> I mean that many Windows use the PATH, and as such, may fail if a new >> directory is added to the PATH that contains a DLL they indirectly use. > > Then it's just a matter of not putting any DLLs in those directories, isn't > it?
A. It's not just DLLs. Any program invoking CreateProcess might pick up the Python executable. This might be confusing if the program would previously pick up a different Python installation. B. I don't think this can work: we *must* install DLLs into the Python directory - at least pythonxy.dll (at least the way Python is currently build - maybe SxS would allow to place it elsewhere). I *think* we also need to place the CRT manifest in the directory; not sure what consequences this has. > Most Linux distributions solve that by installing binaries named > /usr/bin/python2.4, /usr/bin/python2.5, etc., and making /usr/bin/python a > symlink to one of those. Thus if a program relies on particular Python > version, > it can just use a specific executable rather than a generic one. Unfortunately, symlinks are not available on Windows. OTOH, other things *are* available, such as registered extensions. For example, you don't need python on PATH to start a Python script; just invoking the .py file will find the Python interpreter from the registry. I don't think it is wise to apply Unix solutions to Windows problems. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
