On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Paul Wiseman <poal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 September 2012 20:16, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Michael McCracken >> <michael.mccrac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > FWIW, here's how I do something similar now, to avoid having many >> > copies of the Qt libraries. >> >> cool! Thanks for the description >> >> > There is one master app, and several sub-apps. >> > >> > * call setup() for each of the apps, generating full separate apps >> > with copies of the Qt libraries and other stuff >> > -- each call has a unique directory sent in the setup options >> > "bdist_base" and "dist_dir". This avoids sharing build state, as >> > mentioned earlier in the thread. This seems to work fine, calling >> > setup() multiple times in the same script. >> >> good to know -- I think the OP was right, the conflict over the >> sharing build dirs -- I didn't know you could override that. >> >> > * inside main app Contents/Resources, create empty sub.app/ directory >> > * for each sub app: >> > ** copy sub.app/Contents/MacOS into >> > main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/MacOS >> > ** copy sub.app/Contents/Info.plist into >> > main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/Info.plist >> > ** copy everything in sub.app/Contents/Resources/ that isn't include >> > or lib into main.app/Contents/Resources/sub.app/Contents/Resources/ >> > ** create symlinks for sub.app/Contents/Resources/include -> >> > main.app/Contents/Resources/include (do the same with Resources/lib) >> >> OK -- here is where I"m confused -- with a sylink, you can do either >> relative or absoute path, yes? absolute wouldn't work, as who knows >> where the user will install it -- but relative could, as long as the >> users keeps them all together -- is that how you handle it? >> >> Alternatively I suppose you could require that main.app be installed >> in /Library/Frameworks or something, and then symlink to the absolute >> path. >> >> I actually kind of like that idea, 'cause it would keep the apps a bit >> more distinct, -- I have a base I want to use with multiple apps but >> don't necessarily want folks to have to install everything at once to >> use one. > > > You could create the multiple apps at run time when running the main app, > that's not too far away from what I'm doing at the moment. I think it's > mainly just a few xml plist files that cant be symlinked because they wont > be the same as the main app. A slightly easier solution would be to zip the > apps up and drop them in place and relatively symlink the needed parts back > to the main app.
Yep, this could probably be made to work, but would break code signatures on any apps that you changed in that way - just something to keep in mind. _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
