In article <calgmxejblpxdfan3xwrqqdtdamgy+djzojfbyapmtu1euan...@mail.gmail.com>, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
> The numpy folks are trying hard to get binary wheel sup on PyPi yeah! > > But this brought hup an issue -- PyPI policy is that binary wheels should > be built for the python.org binaries -- which is great. [...] > So is it officially supported to link a *.so built against a older SDK to a > application buit with a newer SDK? If so ,then this seems a > nice convenience for the MAc crowd. I've just commented on this in more detail on the pip issue tracker: https://github.com/pypa/pip/pip/pull/1465 The short answer is that there are at least two issues here: older SDK vs newer SDK and python.org Python vs Apple-supplied system Python. In general, we don't officially test these combinations nor claim to support them but, for many cases, they do seem to work OK, modulo some known potential gotchas (like mixing C++ runtimes on 10.9). We do specifically support that current python.org Pythons built on 10.6 work on 10.6 through 10.9 and that it is possible to build C extensions on any of them that will work on at least that installed OS X version. In other words, if you want to build a C extension module that works with 10.6 through 10.9, the safest approach is to use the 10.6 SDK. If you only need it to work on your current system, the installed system headers should be OK, which Distutils falls back to if the SDK is not available in its traditional location. -- Ned Deily, n...@acm.org _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
