Bob Ippolito wrote: > > On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Jordan Mantha wrote: > >> Ok, so I recently got my first mac, an Intel iMac (17") for work. >> So far I have been totally impressed. I really enjoy OSX and starting >> to get into Python more. However, I'm starting to feel bad that I >> have this thing and I'm not helping with testing/building Universal >> packages for other people to enjoy. I'm particularly interested in >> scientific python packages (scipy and friends, matplotlib, pyx, etc.) >> and wxpython. Is there a general place to find tutorials or something >> on creating Universal python packages? I'd like to help fill in >> http://pythonmac.org/wiki/UniversalPackages if I can. How would I go >> about doing that? > > The packages on that list are "unfriendly" in that they will not > trivially compile universally. Getting those packages up to universal > snuff is probably best left for the people who are already familiar with > the peculiarities of those packages and the nuances of OS X porting and > universal binaries. Most other packages should compile trivially out of > the box. > > However, if you have a LOT of free time on your hands and you're > interested in the ugly details you'll want to read up on: > 1. the lipo command > 2. the -arch and -isysroot flags to cc > 2. the -syslibroot and -arch flags to ld. > > The universal build ships with a Makefile that tells distutils what to > do, but anything with external dependencies will need those dependencies > compiled by hand with custom environment variables to produce a > universal static or dynamic library out of them. Sometimes it's > trivial, other times not (especially if it does something stupid like > endian or CPU detection at ./configure time) and you may have to compile > PPC then i386 and lipo the result together (which may require a separate > machine for each architecture). >
Thanks for the info. I'll try to check those points. The universal builds sound a bit scary, which is probably the reason they aren't all over the place. I would assume creating Intel-only packages is easier, is that right? Can bdist_mpkg (and py2app for that matter) be used on Intel macs with the Universal Python 2.4.3 build? I'd like to learn how to use bdist_mpkg and py2app. I'm having a bit of trouble figuring where various packages are when it comes to Intel compatibility. Would making .mpkgs be a more realistic goal? Sorry if my questions are seeming silly. I'm used to building from source for myself and Linux packaging. -Jordan Mantha _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
