Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
+00: googled for the mingw home page
+00: found the mingw download page
+02: finally figured out what to download
+03: noticed that my usual SF site only offered 1K/s; aborted download
+07: finished downloading the mingw kit from another SF site
+17: finished installing
+18: added \mingw\bin to the path
+18: typed python setup.py install --compiler=mingw32
+18: got a linker error; googled for help
+19: copied python24.dll to \mingw\lib
+20: finished building the sample library (cElementTree); all tests pass
Impressive. How did you record the minutes? ;) I'd like to know wether
this is a single observation or true for most if not all your MinGW
builds?
I used Borland's C++ Compiler (free and commercial) and had frequently
to tweak .def files and the source to make it work. I also had to
transform the python dll with COFF2OMF because the library interfaces
of python.dll and the Borland binaries were different.
If your MinGW experience described above is typical then I'll get a
stop watch and give it a try ;)
--
---
Peter Maas, M+R Infosysteme, D-52070 Aachen, Tel +49-241-93878-0
E-mail 'cGV0ZXIubWFhc0BtcGx1c3IuZGU=\n'.decode('base64')
---
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Markus Wankus wrote: George Sakkis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [...] The Essence is this one, as stated before: [huge copy paste of previous post] The Essence is irrelevant. - - - All your thread are belong to us. - - - For great justice! ;o) [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On 2005-02-23, Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Essence is this one, as stated before: [huge copy paste of previous post] The Essence is irrelevant. - All your thread are belong to us. - For great justice! ;o) [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Um, you realize that nobody in this thread takes you the least bit seriously and people are just poking you with a stick to watch you jump? -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! An INK-LING? Sure -- at TAKE one!! Did you BUY any visi.comCOMMUNIST UNIFORMS?? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Grant Edwards wrote: [...] Um, you realize that nobody in this thread takes you the least bit seriously and people are just poking you with a stick to watch you jump? jump: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Grant Edwards wrote: [...] Um, you realize that nobody in this thread takes you the least bit seriously and people are just poking you with a stick to watch you jump? jump: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Lol, this guy is hopeless :-) George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Sakkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Grant Edwards wrote: [...] Um, you realize that nobody in this thread takes you the least bit seriously and people are just poking you with a stick to watch you jump? jump: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 Lol, this guy is hopeless :-) Who's Guido? -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limitedhttp://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk RSI Information:http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] Who's Guido? Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. - I've send an addition CC of this message to the python-foundation, which will hopefully take some steps to improve the build-system. [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 - Thank's for every bit of contribution, which has made this thread an worthfull insight into the python-community. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. That one crashed my parser. Thank's for every bit of contribution, which has made this thread an worthfull insight into the python-community. To really get a sense of the Python community (at least the Usenet branch), you should see how it responds to typical questions and requests for help. The response you received is not really typical, because your attitude has been atypical. Just sayin', Nick -- # sigmask || 0.2 || 20030107 || public domain || feed this to a python print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?') -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] Who's Guido? Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. Who is care by time? -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limitedhttp://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk RSI Information:http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Nick Vargish wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guido is the one, who should care by time about the status of the python-community. That one crashed my parser. Sounds like a new Ministry song - Guido Crashed my Parser. Could be the sequel to Jesus Built My Hot Rod. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
George Sakkis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Nick Vargish wrote: You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. [...] The discussion is over. At least the in-topic one. Everything else is babbling, hairsplitting, playing an AI which does not understand writings and all this unproductive garbage. The Essence is this one, as stated before: [huge copy paste of previous post] The Essence is irrelevant. - - - All your thread are belong to us. - - - For great justice! ;o) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
[...]
closing thread
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1
Nope. You are not entitled to close thread. This is irrelevant.
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Should a professional developer take python serious?
A *professionnal developper*, yes. But this is irrelevant to you.
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On 2005-02-20, Nick Vargish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BrainDead [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email address, this may well be relevant. [ 4-line URL snipped ] Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit to tinyurl.com before posting a monster like that... :^) I've never understood the problem with long URLs. Many newsreaders let you click on them. If not, you just cut/paste it into a browser (with a shellscript a couple lines long, you can start firefox with the URL on the X clipboard with a single command). -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm a GENIUS! I at want to dispute sentence visi.comstructure with SUSAN SONTAG!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Nick Vargish wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now it's really time to close this thread. I suspect this will fall of deaf ears, but I have to mention that you do not get to close threads on Usenet. this is obvious. You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. [...] The discussion is over. At least the in-topic one. Everything else is babbling, hairsplitting, playing an AI which does not understand writings and all this unproductive garbage. The Essence is this one, as stated before: Summarized Suggestions for the Python Team, PSF, Community): - - - An automated-build-process-system should allow community-members to add their targets (e.g. MinGW) into an special incubation section, which does not in any way affect the main section (which contains the official production targets, e.g. MSVC). If an incubation section target proves over time as stable and supported (by community contributions), it is moved to the official-auto-build. - The python-team should * detect any efforts made within the community to support different build-targets * attract/engourage the authors/teams to include the patches/sources into the main build-system * attract/engourage the authors/teams to have open projects with an collaboration infrastructure. - The python-community and the PSF should support the python-team to fulfill the above tasks, thus the python-teams effort is limited to provide the infrastructure (incubation-build-targets). - - - Practical example: Engourage the current pyMinGW project to become a open collaborative project: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html * as a first step, setup a pyMinGW mailinglist * intrested people can come together an communicate * as a second step, setup an SVN * intrested projects could get your patch via SVN * as a third step, find intrested contributors * which would help testing * which would help you with coding The python-team setups a build-target, which the collaborative pyMinGW project tries to make valid. - - - Now it's really time to close this thread. . . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
I've never understood the problem with long URLs. Many newsreaders let you click on them. If not, you just cut/paste it into a browser (with a shellscript a couple lines long, you can start firefox with the URL on the X clipboard with a single command). Some break the urls - so copy and pasting yields only start or end of the urls, depending on the browser/edit control your pasting into. -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Nick Vargish wrote: You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. [...] The discussion is over. At least the in-topic one. Everything else is babbling, hairsplitting, playing an AI which does not understand writings and all this unproductive garbage. The Essence is this one, as stated before: [huge copy paste of previous post] The Essence is irrelevant. - - - All your thread are belong to us. - - - George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've never understood the problem with long URLs. Many newsreaders let you click on them. If not, you just cut/paste it into a browser (with a shellscript a couple lines long, you can start firefox with the URL on the X clipboard with a single command). I use Gnus through a screen session, so when I select and copy a long URL I get backslash characters in the copied text (as amusing as it is, w3 is not a satisfying browsing experience for me :^). It's not hard to manually pick out the backslashes, but it's time consuming and kind of tedious. I use an open-source terminal app (iTerm under OS X), so I guess I could hack the open in browser function to remove the backslashes... Hmm... Side projects aside, URLs less than 79 characters long are just easier to handle in many ways. Nick -- # sigmask || 0.2 || 20030107 || public domain || feed this to a python print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?') -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
George Sakkis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Nick Vargish wrote: You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. [...] The discussion is over. At least the in-topic one. Everything else is babbling, hairsplitting, playing an AI which does not understand writings and all this unproductive garbage. The Essence is this one, as stated before: [huge copy paste of previous post] The Essence is irrelevant. It seems that this is true. - - - All your thread are belong to us. This is true [us = a few off-topic-freaks] - - - George [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler Essence: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5ba2a0ba55d4c102 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
A.B., Khalid wrote: [...] - (comments) I've just overflown your comments for a few seconds. And I got my confirmations. Thank you for your time. -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Fredrik Lundh wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. Should I take answers serious? yes. Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? coherence of writings? /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Fredrik Lundh wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. Should I take answers serious? yes. Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? coherence of writings? Ironic, is it not? I think he's referring to the fact that you snipped some of the email you were replying to. -- Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the fields of hell where the grass grows high Are the graves of dreams allowed to die. -- Richard Harter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? If not, why are you asking questions in the first place? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Coherence of writings? Should a professional developer take python serious? Yes. I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? If the team *would* not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process, a professional developer *should* not take python serious. However, since the team *does* manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process, a professional developer *might* take python serious. [a false premise can imply anything] Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Pat wrote: On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which you'd rather remain ignorant. The less fiddling required, the happier the user will be, and the easier it will be for that product to get adopted on that platform. No psychic abilities are required. No Python abilities are required, either, for that matter. ;-) And the fact that building *any* Windows native program without commercial software is a PITA is the py-dev crew's fault, how? The python.org releases provide pre-built binaries for Windows, support for compiling Windows extensions with various compilers (including MinGW), and autoconf/automake support for POSIX-ish platforms (including Cygwin). For native Windows compilation of the interpreter, they support MSVC6 and MSVC7.1. If you're a serious commercial Windows shop, you will have one of the Microsoft compiler suites installed *somewhere*. At that point, building your own version of Python is trivial. Which leaves the hobbyists, and those companies which, for whatever reason, choose not to use Visual Studio to build C/C++ code on Windows. If it meets your needs, the easiest solution is to build a non-native version using Cygwin (./configure, make, make altinstall). That's what I currently do, as the easiest free way to hack Python on a Windows box. Which means our target group is now only those who want to build a Windows Python binary, and don't want to use Visual Studio, and don't want to use Cygwin (hmm, the group under discussion must be getting rather small by now). Anyway, to support this group, the real thing that is needed is a tool to translate the MSVC7.1 solution files into GNU make files (so the MSYS make utility can parse them and invoke MinGW or the free MS compiler appropriately) For anyone who actually wants to make this work, this message summarises where I got to before giving up and switching to a different platform for builds: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047215.html Things have moved on since then - the Python project files no longer reference the unneeded ODBC libraries, but they do reference options the version of vcproj2make in the python-dev archives doesn't understand. Also, vcproj2make has a dependency on PyXML, which isn't necessarily obvious from the error message you get when the sln parser fails to work. It can be done, and it could be automated, but it doesn't take a Python core hacker to do it - it takes someone who cares about it, and understands GNU make and Python well enough to maintain vcproj2make. To finish the job, someone would need to: 1. Commit to maintaining vcproj2make 2. Get Garth to put a real license on it 3. Finish it well enough that it works on the Python PCBuild directory 4. Provide instructions (and possibly a script) for building Python with vcproj2make, MSYS and MinGW. 5. See about including those instructions in Python CVS (MinGW is probably a better option than the free MS compiler, since the files you need aren't scattered all over the MS website, embedded in over 300 MB worth of downloads, and you aren't bound by the MS EULA. Don't go redistributing msvcr71.dll though) The trick is finding someone who cares enough, or someone who will pay someone to care enough - I cared for a while, but not enough to finish it. For what I want (hacking the interpreter core), Cygwin suffices, and it's a hell of a lot easier. The pyMinGW folks appear to care, but for reasons best known to them, have chosen to track the PCBuild project files manually, rather than automating the process. They've also chosen to maintain separate files on their own site, rather than providing diff's and submitting appropriate patches to improve MinGW support in the main Python CVS. *shrug* Their call. Cheers, Nick. P.S. if Ilias volunteers, or offers to pay someone to do this, instead of just complaining, will hell freeze over?) -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --- http://boredomandlaziness.skystorm.net -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
If you put yourself into the shoes of someone who decides to use a Python product that requires compiling, and that product contains C extensions that also need compiling, you'll see that it doesn't matter whether or not that individual has actually written a single line of Python themselves. If the compiling process is not easy, then that user will be forced to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which they'd rather remain ignorant. If an extension for python is written in C, usually the extension will be available in binary form. As the porting from unix to windows takes some effort, an extension needs testing on windows anyway. So unless you develop extensions yourself, you don't need a compiler at all. On Linux, I've installed and used/compiled products in a variety of languages in which I've never written a single line of source code myself. In most cases the process works fairly well. When it doesn't, I'm forced to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which I'd rather remain ignorant. The result is usually a good deal of frustration and anger on my part. On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which you'd rather remain ignorant. The less fiddling required, the happier the user will be, and the easier it will be for that product to get adopted on that platform. No psychic abilities are required. No Python abilities are required, either, for that matter. ;-) We're not talking end users here. If you have a product developed, you can ship that - including binary parts compiled for windows. If I recall your earlier post correctly, you wanted to use qt-x11 under windows. So you want to use a piece of software which explicitely is not supposed to run under windows - as there is a commercial version available for windows. While I can understand the desire to have GPL version of Qt for windows (which will become reality with qt4), I can't avoid to think that you chose a deliberately rough path to follow. So there you are. If you want things easy, pay for a msvc compiler + qt windows version. Then things will be pretty straightforward. As others (including me) have stated before: windows is a commercial product. You have to pay to use it, and you have to pay to develop for it. That's the way MS wants it. The alternatives are there - but you can't have your cake and eat it. -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Should I take answers serious?
If not, why are you asking questions in the first place?
simply read the next question, which limits the scope of the first one.
Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings?
Coherence of writings?
An example:
they above 2 questions are coherent, thus answering isolated [as you've
done] makes not much sense.
Should I take answers serious?
Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings?
[answering here makes sense]
Should a professional developer take python serious?
Yes.
I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a
multi-target automated-build-process?
If the team *would* not manage at least the foundation of a
multi-target automated-build-process, a professional developer
*should* not take python serious.
Very nice.
At this point, we agree very much.
However, since the team *does* manage at least the foundation of
a multi-target automated-build-process, a professional developer
*might* take python serious.
here our disagreement:
= {managing the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process}
What are the requirements for fulfilling this?
[a false premise can imply anything]
again you ignore coherent writings.
-
You have omitted the following part of my writings:
[targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They
could be added/managed/maintained by community members]
in which I essentially define a few requirements for managing the
foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process.
-
The python team should provide the fundamental infrastructure for the
community, thus it can add/manage/maintain build targets.
Additionally:
* The python-team should detect any efforts made for different
build-targets
* The python-team should attract/engourage the authors to include
them in the main build-system [incubation section].
The python-community and the PSF supports the python-team to take the
above actions.
Regards,
Martin
.
--
http://lazaridis.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
[snip, Ilias would not understand it] P.S. if Ilias volunteers, or offers to pay someone to do this, instead of just complaining, will hell freeze over?) Nick, There is about as much chance of hell freezing over as there is of England beating Australia in the cricket this summer. [I'am a half-caste, English father, Welsh mother. Makes it worse when you are watching rugby :)] To get back to Ilias, people on c.l.py have already pointed out that he has been banned from other mailing lists, responds to 99% of assistance with not relevant, off topic, or some similar garbage, and obviously has no intention of actually delivering anything to anybody. See c.l.clipper.visual-objects amognst other ngs for their opinion on this megastar. Me, I use Python to write simple programs to suit my own needs. I have never in the last three/four years needed to ask a question because the documentation provided is perfectly adequate for me, failing which Google this ng for an answer. Ilias, If you can't stand the heat, get out of the server room. Kindest regards. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: they above 2 questions are coherent, thus answering isolated [as you've done] makes not much sense. Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? Except that the quote here above is NOT what was in your original posting. Here is the *real* quote (also note that Python uses instead of for delimiting a multi-line string: Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? If you insert a blank line between two sentences most people in this newsgroup (and in the western world in general) will interprete that as the start of a new paragraph, as an indication that what follows is something different than what precedes the blank line. If you want to obtain coherence of writing between two sentences, then maybe you shouldn't type them as different paragraphs. If you would have written: Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? it would have been much more coherent. Regards, Jan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Jan Dries wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] - (things which justify inability of coherence-detection) If you would have written: Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? it would have been much more coherent. I understand. Let's see: - Should I take answers serious? . . . . Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? - - - I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. [Except if you want to ignore it, thus you can get at least _one_ 'points' ins this discussion] Regards, Jan . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: I understand. no. /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? . . . . Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? - - - I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. I don't. The second fragment is not even correct English (it does not have a verb in the main phrase, and Answer is lacking an article). So I have to guess what you could have meant. If you want to be understood, you might have phrased the question like this: Should I take answers from people which do not respect coherence of writings serious? Or, if this splits the adjective too much from the verb, you could also write Should I take answers serious if they come from people which do not respect coherence of writings? This *still* would not have meant that I had understood the question, since I still don't know what coherence of writings is (as you failed to give a definition when I last asked), but atleast I would have realized that I don't understand the question, and refrained from answering it. Perhaps the question was meant rhetoric. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On 2005-02-20, Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you would have written: Should I take answers serious? Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? it would have been much more coherent. I understand. I doubt it. I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. You, sir, are a loon. I've detected little coherence in _any_ of your postings. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I want to TAKE IT at HOME and DRESS IT UP in visi.comHOT PANTS!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Nick Coghlan wrote: Pat wrote: On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which you'd rather remain ignorant. The less fiddling required, the happier the user will be, and the easier it will be for that product to get adopted on that platform. No psychic abilities are required. No Python abilities are required, either, for that matter. ;-) And the fact that building *any* Windows native program without commercial software is a PITA is the py-dev crew's fault, how? I don't recall saying that it was their fault, but if I gave that impression I apologize. I'm mainly reacting to those individuals who keep claiming that things couldn't be any simpler and that there is no problem. Based on the quality of the rest of your reply, you clearly on not one of those individuals. In fact, you have given some great information here. So thank you. It is greatly appreciated. The python.org releases provide pre-built binaries for Windows, support for compiling Windows extensions with various compilers (including MinGW), and autoconf/automake support for POSIX-ish platforms (including Cygwin). True, and I've always been glad that Tim Peters went through all the trouble of creating and supporting the Windows binaries because I was on the Windows platform when I first got introduced to Python. Thank you, Tim! For native Windows compilation of the interpreter, they support MSVC6 and MSVC7.1. If you're a serious commercial Windows shop, you will have one of the Microsoft compiler suites installed *somewhere*. At that point, building your own version of Python is trivial. True, but see my reply to your subsequent points. Which leaves the hobbyists, and those companies which, for whatever reason, choose not to use Visual Studio to build C/C++ code on Windows. Exactly. And how big is that group, really? It might be quite large. If it meets your needs, the easiest solution is to build a non-native version using Cygwin (./configure, make, make altinstall). That's what I currently do, as the easiest free way to hack Python on a Windows box. Yeah, but Cygwin is a bit scary for Windows folks who aren't familiar with Linux or Unix. Which means our target group is now only those who want to build a Windows Python binary, and don't want to use Visual Studio, and don't want to use Cygwin (hmm, the group under discussion must be getting rather small by now). Actually, I think this group is potentially huge in comparison to the current users of Python. It's just that they aren't currently represented in the Python community. Look at the PythonCard project. I was involved in the early stages of its formation (that was when I wrote PyCrust, which was incorporated into PythonCard). A great deal of the interest in PythonCard was from hobbyists, VBers, old HyperCard developers, etc. These folks were not your typical Python programmers. They just wanted a simple tool that they could use to create simple applications. Now what if PythonCard started using some C source code as part of their project? They would either have to provide binaries, or they would have to make it easy for their developer community, many of whom are on Windows, to be able to compile C extensions for Python. If they couldn't make it easy, they would risk alienating many of their supporters. So my only point is that by making it easier to use C extensions, we have an opportunity to make Python more attractive to a broader audience that includes hobbyists and folks that do not want to pay for commercial C compilers. And I think there may very well be more C code in typical projects with all the cool tools getting used, like Pyrex and such. [snip] The rest of your message provided great information. Thank you very much. -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtechhttp://www.orbtech.com Schevo http://www.schevo.org Pypersyst http://www.pypersyst.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
[Snip] Martin, I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email address, this may well be relevant. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/de.admin.net-abuse.news/browse_frm/thread/8914399857641c05/4163a4fb8a624349?q=Ilias_done=%2Fgroup%2Fde.admin.net-abuse.news%2Fsearch%3Fgroup%3Dde.admin.net-abuse.news%26q%3DIlias%26qt_g%3D1%26searchnow%3DSearch+this+group%26_doneTitle=Back+to+Searchd#4163a4fb8a624349 Regards. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should I take answers serious? [...] Answer from people which do not respect coherence of writings? [...] I still detect the coherence. As most people in this group will detect the coherence. I don't. The second fragment is not even correct English [...] - (limits of AI) . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Summarized Suggestions for the Python Team, PSF, Community): - - - An automated-build-process-system should allow community-members to add their targets (e.g. MinGW) into an special incubation section, which does not in any way affect the main section (which contains the official production targets, e.g. MSVC). If an incubation section target proves over time as stable and supported (by community contributions), it is moved to the official-auto-build. - The python-team should * detect any efforts made within the community to support different build-targets * attract/engourage the authors/teams to include the patches/sources into the main build-system * attract/engourage the authors/teams to have open projects with an collaboration infrastructure. - The python-community and the PSF should support the python-team to fulfill the above tasks, thus the python-teams effort is limited to provide the infrastructure (incubation-build-targets). - - - Practical example: Engourage the current pyMinGW project to become a open collaborative project: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html * as a first step, setup a pyMinGW mailinglist * intrested people can come together an communicate * as a second step, setup an SVN * intrested projects could get your patch via SVN * as a third step, find intrested contributors * which would help testing * which would help you with coding The python-team setups a build-target, which the collaborative pyMinGW project tries to make valid. - - - Now it's really time to close this thread. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
BrainDead [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email address, this may well be relevant. [ 4-line URL snipped ] Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit to tinyurl.com before posting a monster like that... :^) Nick -- # sigmask || 0.2 || 20030107 || public domain || feed this to a python print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?') -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Martin v. Löwis: So I have to guess what you could have meant. If you want to be understood, you might have phrased the question like this: Should I take answers from people which do not respect coherence of writings serious? The main grammatical problem with the question is the use of an adjective (serious) rather than an adverb (seriously) to modify the verb take. Should I take answers seriously? I'd also add in an article to point to the particular answers to be disregarded. Should I take these answers seriously? Next problem is the disagreement in number between answers and answer which breaks the connection just as separating the questions does. Answers from people which do not respect coherence of writings? There are more problems to fix but this is a start. Grammatical errors are often perceived as rudeness. Perhaps the question was meant rhetoric. Aghhh! He's got you doing it too. Neil -- Aussie ear for the foreign guy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now it's really time to close this thread. I suspect this will fall of deaf ears, but I have to mention that you do not get to close threads on Usenet. You can excuse yourself from this one and stop replying to comments, but you don't get to unilaterally declare a discussion over. Just not how it works, though in this case an exception might be welcomed... Nick -- # sigmask || 0.2 || 20030107 || public domain || feed this to a python print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?') -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Nick Vargish wrote: BrainDead [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email address, this may well be relevant. [ 4-line URL snipped ] Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit to tinyurl.com before posting a monster like that... :^) Nick -- # sigmask || 0.2 || 20030107 || public domain || feed this to a python print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?') Nick, Sorry about that, forgot to engage brain before doing cut and paste. At least I can learn, unlike some well known people.:) Regards. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
A.B., Khalid wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. You are mistaken. The first steps are the following: [...] - (nonrelevant comments) 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe-- is an altogether different issue. The fact of the matter remains that a project _does_ exist, one which people (including myself) do in fact use; and because it does exist there is no reason to make it. [...] I've already understood your viewpoint. I've realized, that there is a single-person-centric project pyMinGW which does not encourage collaboration (due to missing public resources like mailinglist). My requirements about an open-source project (or sub-project) are very simple: a communication resource, a code-repository, an issue-tracking-system. I've suggested you to transform your personal project to a collaborative project, starting with an dedicated mailinglist etc.: thank you for your comments. I will express my suggestion more practically * as a first step, I would setup a pyMinGW mailinglist * intrested people can come together an communicate * as a second step, I would setup an SVN * intrested projects could get your patch via SVN * as a third step, I would find intrested contributors * which would help testing * which would help you with coding All this could happen without (or with very low) efforts for you. - You have the right to refuse this. I (and any other reader) have the right to derive our conclusions about you and the reasons that you refuse a _real_ collaborative work. . -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: My questions: It appears that nobody has answered the questions, yet. a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? We don't have the resources to do that. b) Why does the Python Foundation not ensure, that the python source-code is directly compilable with MinGW? In the past, we did not do that because we did not know how to do it. With Python 2.4.1, we now had a contribution that should allow direct compilation of extensions using MingW. c) Why are the following efforts not _directly_ included in the python source code base? http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html I believe this was because it was never contributed to Python. d) Is it really neccessary that I dive into such adventures, to be able to do the most natural thing like: developing python extensions with MinGW? http://starship.python.net/crew/kernr/mingw32/Notes.html No. These instructions are outdated. e) Is there any official statement available regarding the msvcr71.dll and other MS licensing issues? [see several threads [Python-Dev] Is msvcr71.dll re-redistributable?] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/thread.html No, there isn't. f) Are there any official (Python Foundation) statements / rationales available, which explain why the MinGW compiler is unsupported, although parts of the community obviously like to use it? http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/dc3474e6c8053336 The official statement is that the MingW compiler is supported, indeed. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Martin v. Löwis wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: My questions: It appears that nobody has answered the questions, yet. a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? We don't have the resources to do that. Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] b) Why does the Python Foundation not ensure, that the python source-code is directly compilable with MinGW? In the past, we did not do that because we did not know how to do it. With Python 2.4.1, we now had a contribution that should allow direct compilation of extensions using MingW. I'm refering to compile the main python source-code with MigGW. [As a result, compilation of extensions under MinGW becomes trivial] c) Why are the following efforts not _directly_ included in the python source code base? http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html I believe this was because it was never contributed to Python. ok You should possibly engourage the author to create an collaborative project. d) Is it really neccessary that I dive into such adventures, to be able to do the most natural thing like: developing python extensions with MinGW? http://starship.python.net/crew/kernr/mingw32/Notes.html No. These instructions are outdated. ok [the author has placed a remark now, avoiding this way further missunderstandings.] e) Is there any official statement available regarding the msvcr71.dll and other MS licensing issues? [see several threads [Python-Dev] Is msvcr71.dll re-redistributable?] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/thread.html No, there isn't. Seeing the discussions which raise around this topic, I think the foundation should provide an official statement [e.g. contact MS to get an official statement]. f) Are there any official (Python Foundation) statements / rationales available, which explain why the MinGW compiler is unsupported, although parts of the community obviously like to use it? http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/dc3474e6c8053336 The official statement is that the MingW compiler is supported, indeed. Thus the official statement should be possibly corrected. * Compiling Python source-code under MinGW is not directly supported. * Compliling extensions under MinGW leads possibly to problems. Regards, Martin . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Should a professional developer take python serious? Unnecessary and deliberately provoking question - python is taken seriously, e.g. by multi-billion dollar companies like google and zope. You OTH have provided no evidence so far that you can be taken seriously as a developer of whatever kind - neither professional nor hobbyist. So one has to question the relevance of your demands. I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? Plain wrong. The team does very well manage that process - for a large variety of platforms and compilers. Just not the compiler you perceive as being a necessity. But that dead horse has been beaten enough already. -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Unnecessary and deliberately provoking question - python is taken seriously, e.g. by multi-billion dollar companies like google and zope. Of course zope corporation is not amongst the multi-billion dollar companies - by now. But who knows :) -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) Should a professional developer take python serious? I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) And that from you *lol* I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? Repeating nonsense doesn't increase it's validity. Python makes use of autoconf/automake to support a wide range of platforms and compilers. As you obviously haven't heard of these and refuse to google, I was so kind to research the respective links to the tools: http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/ http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/ http://www.amath.washington.edu/~lf/tutorials/autoconf/ Enjoy the read. [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] You already found the mingw-patch for building python. It is added/managed/maintained by community members. Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your life? -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? yes. /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Should a professional developer take python serious? [...] - (ungentle babbling after disrupting coherence of writings) And that from you *lol* Of course. I respect the coherence of writings of my conversation partners. [If they are in-topic / in-context] I mean, if the team does not manage at least the foundation of a multi-target automated-build-process? Repeating nonsense doesn't increase it's validity. Python makes use of [...] - (babbling, gentle links) Thank you for the links. They are irrelevant for me. But other readers for sure will enjoy. - The automated-build-process-system should allow community-members to add their targets into an special incubation section, which does not in any way affect the main section (which contains the official production targets). If an incubation section target proves over time as stable and supported, it is moved to the official-auto-build. [targets need not to be supported directly by the python team. They could be added/managed/maintained by community members] You already found the mingw-patch for building python. It is added/managed/maintained by community members. This is a one-man-show, which does not invite to open collaboration (feedback is requested to closed email): http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/98fa42dabff68db2 python [foundation, crew, dictator, ...] should engourage open collaboration, should engourage _collaboration_. Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the extension system. And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your life? 0 (zero). . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Thank you for the links. They are irrelevant for me. As usual. Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the extension system. And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your life? 0 (zero). Awesome. Without any lines of code written, you have already identified the areas where python lacks features that have to be overcome with C-written extensions. As usual, I stand with my mouth agape over your near-psychic abilities to analyze even the complexest matters without any actual fiddling with the nitty gritty details. The day where you team up with Uri Geller - who will make even the worst code running by just putting a printout of it on top of an image of the master himself - is to be feared by all of us humble developers who actually _deal_ with problems. -- Regards, Diez B. Roggisch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Thank you for the links. They are irrelevant for me. As usual. sorry. Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the extension system. And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your life? 0 (zero). Awesome. Without any lines of code written, you have already identified the areas where python lacks features that have to be overcome with C-written extensions. writing code is not the only way. As usual, I stand with my mouth agape over your near-psychic abilities to analyze even the complexest matters without any actual fiddling with the nitty gritty details. Nothing special. Abstraction, Generalization, Inhibition. The day where you team up with Uri Geller - who will make even the worst code running by just putting a printout of it on top of an image of the master himself - is to be feared by all of us humble developers who actually _deal_ with problems. Don't worry. Mr. Geller will be shortly hired by Sun Microsystems. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: A.B., Khalid wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. You are mistaken. The first steps are the following: [...] - (nonrelevant comments) 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe-- is an altogether different issue. The fact of the matter remains that a project _does_ exist, one which people (including myself) do in fact use; and because it does exist there is no reason to make it. [...] I've already understood your viewpoint. You just say that you do. Your repeating the same arguments using the same logic testifies that you don't. My requirements about an open-source project (or sub-project) are very simple: Your requirements are just what they are, _your_ requirements. And since they are so, maybe you'd like to address them yourself instead of continuing to complain how your requirements (simple or otherwise) are not being met and that hence the author of this project is this, and/or the entire language is that. Enough said here. You have the right to refuse this. I (and any other reader) have the right to derive our conclusions about you and the reasons that you refuse a _real_ collaborative work. Of course I have the right to do what I like (and as regards pyMinGW this was explained earlier in this thread); your mere pronunciation that I have that right neither subtracts nor adds to it one iota. And it seems to me that the community has indeed reached some conclusions which any reasonable person with a fair grasp of English can quickly identify from the nature of their responses to you, here and elsewhere. You already found the mingw-patch for building python. It is added/managed/maintained by community members. This is a one-man-show, which does not invite to open collaboration (feedback is requested to closed email): http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/98fa42dabff68db2 python [foundation, crew, dictator, ...] should engourage open collaboration, should engourage _collaboration_. Oh well, I hope it would not come as a shock to you that pyMinGW does allow collaboration. Here is a quote from the pyMinGW-24 changes document: - pyMinGW-24-0064: Dec 11th, 2004 - [1] Included \PC\pyconfig.h in the Python24.iss. Thanks to Matthias Gondan for the report and the fix. Quoted from http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW-24.html So you see, the collaborative effort is there. It is just not responding to your requirements to your liking that is bothering you! Now if you want to continue complaining about how your requirements are not being met, by volunteers who make their work available for free in their spare time, to your liking, go ahead. Knock yourself out. Khalid -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Diez B. Roggisch wrote: Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you planning to write? I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of the extension system. And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your life? 0 (zero). Awesome. Without any lines of code written, you have already identified the areas where python lacks features that have to be overcome with C-written extensions. As usual, I stand with my mouth agape over your near-psychic abilities to analyze even the complexest matters without any actual fiddling with the nitty gritty details. If you put yourself into the shoes of someone who decides to use a Python product that requires compiling, and that product contains C extensions that also need compiling, you'll see that it doesn't matter whether or not that individual has actually written a single line of Python themselves. If the compiling process is not easy, then that user will be forced to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which they'd rather remain ignorant. On Linux, I've installed and used/compiled products in a variety of languages in which I've never written a single line of source code myself. In most cases the process works fairly well. When it doesn't, I'm forced to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which I'd rather remain ignorant. The result is usually a good deal of frustration and anger on my part. On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty gritty details about which you'd rather remain ignorant. The less fiddling required, the happier the user will be, and the easier it will be for that product to get adopted on that platform. No psychic abilities are required. No Python abilities are required, either, for that matter. ;-) -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtechhttp://www.orbtech.com Schevo http://www.schevo.org Pypersyst http://www.pypersyst.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
[this is a summary of a private conversation that I had with the
developer of the phMinGW. It contains just my comments. I've send
additionally a CC via email (private-to-public switch notification)]
-
A.B., Khalid wrote:
[...]
Khalid,
first of all I like to thank you for the efforts you have taken to
provide pyMinGW to the python community.
I would like to assist you with your efforts, see below.
If passing all the regression tests of the official Windows Python
distribution is an indication of the quality of patch-- and pyMinGW
patched and MinGW built Python does pass all of them-- then one is
inclined to say that pyMinGW is a good patch.
= {pyMinGW is a good patch}
The reason why it is, on the other hand, not included in the official
distribution is threefold.
1. Contrary to what many might imagine, I don't think enough people
use MinGW to frankly justify any extra effort beyond pyMinGW.
The defined extra effort is the effort to provide the patches for the
main source-code base?
If you can send me an email of how to do this, I would take this effort.
of course I must first know, that the python-team would accept those
patches (technical applicability provided).
Thus this can wait, until an official response.
2. Given number 1 above, this patch, I believe, and I could be
mistaken, must not rush to be included in Python's core;
Of course you are right.
people like your esteemed person should test it (note that it is
designed not to interfere with your trusted and working official
Python, if any);
= {trusted and working official python}
: it is
only when enough people do such testing that there will be a case for
it to be included in Python's core.
I agree with you.
If you are willing to extend your project, thus the intrested community
members can collaborate, I would like to assist you to do so.
I would try to take away all setup efforts from you.
3. Finally. there is nothing wrong with third-party patches if they
get the job done, which I believe is the case with pyMinGW.
You have stated above: trusted and working official python
The main goal would be, to get a trusted and working official python
based on MinGW, _within_ the official source-code-base.
The secondary goal would be, to get a trusted and working official
python based on MinGW, _with_ a very close to the official
source-code-base (possibly with just one #define).
-
Please contact me vial email if you are intrested.
Regards, Khalid
Best Regards,
ILIAS LAZARIDIS
-
-
-
After some comments, [which did not show to me an intrested of making
the above happen (which is fully in the developers rights)], I've
simplified my suggestions in the following message:
thank you for your comments.
I will express my suggestion more practically
* as a first step, I would setup a pyMinGW mailinglist
* intrested people can come together an communicate
* as a second step, I would setup an SVN
* intrested projects could get your patch via SVN
* as a third step, I would find intrested contributors
* which would help testing
* which would help you with coding
All this could happen without (or with very low) efforts for you.
-
-
-
I got no answer.
-
-
-
.
--
http://lazaridis.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
It looks like here the only worth words are yours. Didn't you close this thread? I will refresh your mind with your own unpolite way: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 Anyway, I will add some comments: The defined extra effort is the effort to provide the patches for the main source-code base? If you can send me an email of how to do this, I would take this effort. Good for you. of course I must first know, that the python-team would accept those patches (technical applicability provided). There is no guaranty. Did you forget the reply from Tim Peters: [...] A problem is that a patch won't get reviewed unless a volunteer does a review, and we've got an increasing backlog of unreviewed patches because of that. The most effective way for a person P to get their patch reviewed now is for P to volunteer to review 5 other patches first. There are a few Python developers who have promised, in return, to review P's patch then. So, you will have to review some patches first. Ilias Now, can you please tell me the process I have to follow to Ilias suggest the following (to the PSF or to the programmers or to Ilias the decision takers),possibly to get at least a vote on it: Tim No such thing will happen -- forget that. For MinGW to be Tim supported forever, it's necessary and sufficient that a specific Tim person volunteer to support MinGW forever. If that person goes Tim away, so does the support they provided; it's the same story for Tim Cygwin, and even for Linux and native Windows. So, it is not just making the patch. You will have to compromise to support it and not just go away. Regards, Josef -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Josef Meile wrote: It looks like here the only worth words are yours. Didn't you close this thread? yes, but when reviewing again I found this lack [created by myself due to private conversation]. I will refresh your mind with your own unpolite way: I find this very polite [to notify conversation partners instead of letting them wait for an answer]. Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 Anyway, I will add some comments: [...] The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. If one is intrested, he has possibly more luck [than I had] to convince the author of pyMinGW. Good luck. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Robert Kern schreef: And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to developing Python. Except for 'future Python' aka PyPy... http://codespeak.net/pipermail/pypy-dev/2004q4/001696.html :) -- JanC Be strict when sending and tolerant when receiving. RFC 1958 - Architectural Principles of the Internet - section 3.9 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: The first step is to make a pyMinGW project. You are mistaken. The first steps are the following: 1) Realizing that a project _must_ start not because you want it to, but because those who are willing to work on it think it is worth the extra effort for it to. 2) Realizing that what best scratches your back is non other than your own nails. No one is going to do any extra effort for you (or anyone else for that matter) if they have some good reason not to. And both the author of pyMinGW and Tim have already given enough reasons for those who wondered why there is no official Python support for the MinGW compiler earlier in this very thread. 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe-- is an altogether different issue. The fact of the matter remains that a project _does_ exist, one which people (including myself) do in fact use; and because it does exist there is no reason to make it. If one is intrested, he has possibly more luck [than I had] to convince the author of pyMinGW. Of what? To make pyMinGW? To do extra work to your liking that was shown to be nnnecessary especially when pyMinGW can currently get the job done? Let alone the free compiler available for all to use? Whether you realize it or not, those who are interested will download pyMinGW and will test it and they will use it if they find it useful. It is their choice to do so. It is apparent that not only have you not done that, but that you also seem not interested in doing so. That too is your choice. I suspect that no one is going to lose sleep over either choice. I hope I don't come across as condescending, which I hope I never am, but I know I won't. Life goes on. Khalid -- pyMinGW: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Duncan Booth wrote: [...] It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL spreading to other open source software with which it is linked. In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. If I understand this right, I cannot produce commercial software with the cygwin toolset. You cannot produce proprietary software with that toolset. -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more. Free the Memes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Stephen Kellett wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Mike Meyer wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: [...] closing thread http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1 . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Michael Hoffman schrieb:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
But don't act like the volunteers who develop Python owe you a version
of Python that runs out of the box on MinGW. They don't, anymore than you
owe *me* a version of Python that runs out of the box on MinGW.
Please, leave him alone. When he posted here first his tone made me
suspicious and I did some searching. Replies like yours are exactly
what he wants. He is here to fight and to waste your time. But if
you enjoy this ... go ahead ;) I don't so this will be my only post
in this thread.
--
---
Peter Maas, M+R Infosysteme, D-52070 Aachen, Tel +49-241-93878-0
E-mail 'cGV0ZXIubWFhc0BtcGx1c3IuZGU=\n'.decode('base64')
---
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Pat wrote: Actually, no. We ran into some issues with Python 2.4 that caused us to return to Python 2.3.5. But I would really like to upgrade to Python 2.4. So I started researching the subject before I did anything. If you are telling me that minGW can compile extensions that are compatible with the Python 2.4 that uses msvcr71.dll, then that is good news indeed. Is there anything that needs to be configured or patched to make this happen? And how does minGW know which dll to link? What if I have both versions of Python installed - 2.3.5 and 2.4? Is there an easy way to detect this and switch between the two dlls? If I'm asking questions already answered elsewhere, I'd love a link to that resource, if you have it. I use MinGW myself to compile extensions for Python 2.3.x so you should have no problems there. And it seems like from the rest of the thread that it works for Python 2.4 as well. But please just download it, try it out, and report any problems in a separate thread here - I'm sure you'll find people more than willing to help. The actual error messages etc will yield more valuable discussion than any speculation now - or you might find it just working David -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. If I understand this right, I cannot produce commercial software with the cygwin toolset. Contrariwise. You can produce commercial software, and it doesn't have to be GPL licensed. However if you want to distribute it (and much, possibly most, commercial software is never distributed) you have to choose between making it open-source, or buying a commercial license for cygwin. You do realise that you can produce open-source software commercially? If you want to make your program closed source then to distribute it you have to pay for the cygwin license, which all seems pretty fair to me. You have a problem with that? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Tim Peters wrote: [Ilias Lazaridis] ... Let's see: The process would be: a) A Python Foundation official states: of course we accept diversity and of course we are intrested that our source-code-base compiles directly with MinGW (and other compilers). Well, I'm a Director of the Python Software Foundation, and my view is the more platforms the merrier. I extract: you are intrested, that the source-code-base compiles directly with MinGW (and other compilers). Thus you should be intrested, that existent patches are incorporated into the source-code-base. The suggested process ist: use of #defines whenever possible, to avoid influence on the existent behaviour of the code. But I'm not paid to work on Python, and I don't have time to volunteer to help MinGW along, so I don't anticipate that I'll do anything here beyond writing this reply. You have done already very much. But should should take some time to evaluate community needs. I think you're mistaken about the role the PSF plays here. For example, the PSF does no development work on Python -- all work on Python comes from volunteers, and the PSF can't tell anyone what to do. I understand. PSF has no influence on the development. I've read a little around, and start to understand: http://www.python.org/psf/records/board/minutes-2004-11-09.html The PSF did start a grant program last year, and a proposal to [...] - (funding) I don't think that a founding is neccessary. This effort could be driven by the intrested community members (which obviously exist). b) the pyMinGW developer states: I am intrested that my patches are included within the main python source code base [of course this contribution would deserve to be mentioned somewhere] I mean the developer of those patches: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html He must be intrested that his patches are incorporated to the main source code base, which would render his website useless [but of course not his efforts and reputation]. [Of course his website could still serve as an central point for intrested MinGW specific contributors.] c) One part of the Python Community states: look those loosers, like to use MinGW toolkit - pah! I'll continue to use my super-optimizing, xx% faster results, less hassle Microsoft-Compiler From the replies within this thread, i've extracted that some community members would think somehow this way. d) One part of the Python Community states: I'm very happy that my toolset of choice gets official support, to which I can contribute as a community member From the replies within this thread, i've extracted that some community members would think somehow this way. e) there is no point e. People start simply to cooperate, thus python's evolution is ensured. A solid source-code-base and centralized efforts are a fundamentall part for the evolution of python. Sorry, I didn't grasp the point of b thru e. I've tried to clarify. - Now, can you please tell me the process I have to follow to suggest the following (to the PSF or to the programmers or to the decision takers), possibly to get at least a vote on it: Please ensure that the source-code-base compliles directly with MinGW. The suggested process is to: * provide the infrastructure (e.g. mailinglist, issue- tracking-category,... ) * Notify the community about this subproject to channelise efforts * include existing MinGW specific patches * ensure future verificatioin of changes, * optimal:due to an automated build-system * or simpler: due to community-feedback I've read a little about the processes: http://www.python.org/dev/ http://www.python.org/dev/culture.html http://www.python.org/dev/process.html But I can't figure it out. ... Good night to all. Likewise! . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If it is a programming language, the requirement using an open-source toolchain is a rational and valid one. It is. However, mingW has nothing to do with using an open-sourcer toolchain. Python runs in an environment with a full, open-source tool chain. You [...] - (twisting context and personal requirements) sorry, no further comment. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Duncan Booth wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be covered by the GNU GPL. If I understand this right, I cannot produce commercial software with the cygwin toolset. Contrariwise. You can produce commercial software, and it doesn't have to be GPL licensed. However if you want to distribute it (and much, possibly most, commercial software is never distributed) you have to choose between making it open-source, or buying a commercial license for cygwin. You do realise that you can produce open-source software commercially? I understand that I've possibly not expressed myself clear. proprietary software should be the right term, right? If you want to make your program closed source then to distribute it you have to pay for the cygwin license, which all seems pretty fair to me. You have a problem with that? yes. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Robert Kern wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Duncan Booth wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: There is a OS-tool-chain supported on windows, cygwin. this depends on cygwin.dll, which is GPL licensed [or am I wrong?] It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL spreading [...] If I understand this right, I cannot produce commercial software with the cygwin toolset. Wait, you demand a completely open source toolchain on a proprietary operating system to develop proprietary software? I do not 'demand' this. You've described existing constructs, which I simply like to use. The mind *boggles*. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Robert Kern wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] Questions and suggestions are don't count for much in this community. Code and well-written patches do. Stop wasting time on c.l.py and get to work! If you can't do that, then this is not the community you are looking for. Please speak for yourself. I think that my participation in the community for the past six years and a rational examination of the responses you have received so far qualify me, just a little bit, to conclude that this community does not tolerate your kind of behaviour well. I do tolerate their behaviour. I have to. This is a public resource. If you want one that does so tolerate your behaviour, you need to keep looking. I don't need to look. They read, silently, deriving their conclusions. About me. About you. About the python community. [It is of course sad, that the bad manners / missing focusation on the context of the actively writing part reflects directly to the whole community.] There are many commercial systems around python. And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to developing Python. Not even Guido. Who's Guido? The guy who wrote Python originally and is still the head developer. ok http://www.python.org/~guido/ Most of core-Python development happens in people's spare, unpaid time. Volunteerism is the core of this community. Trust me. even if: Volunteerism does not exclude Professionalism. Volunteerism does not, indeed, exclude professionalism. However, being professional does not entail satisfying the desires of everyone who asks. Being professional does not mean that volunteerism is not the driving force of this community. If this does not appeal to you, then this is not the community that you are looking for. I've not understood what you've written. But I understand that it is not relevant to the topic. So please stop this volunteerism-stuff. No. You are asking others to volunteer their time, or perhaps, alternately, the PSF and other businesses to volunteer their money to fund people's time to satisfy *your* wants. I am asking you to volunteer *your* time to satisfy *your* wants, I'm already doing this. Okay, let me clarify: [...] - (processing model) Your suggestions affecting my processing model are irrelevant. or alternately, stop writing questionnaires and bothering us. Feel free to ignore the threads. I would have been more than happy to until my web page was used. Now I feel some obligation to correct some things. You webpage is a public resource. And it was terribly outdated. Now you have corrected your website. Thank you. And please speak for yourself. I am speaking as a member of this community, not necessarily for this community. But I do have some experience with how this community behaves and how it responds to people who behave like you do. I know that they do not mix well at all. If you want a community that does tolerate this behaviour, you need to keep looking. I'm not looking for such a community. Note that this reaction is pretty specific to you and not to other newcomers. Most newcomers do not carry around a sense of entitlement that could flatten a small village. Thus, they are treated with respect and helpfulness. We would appreciate it if you would emulate these people. On a purely pragmatic note, you have to admit that they are getting much better help than you are. I get the help that I want. You could do it much more efficiently. [...] - (processing suggestions detected, not readed) sorry, my processing is not the topic here. If you like to help me and other newcomers, please give me simple some answers on the initial questions. I did provide some answers. Please review them again. Please have the gentleness [against me and the current/future readers] to answer within the context of the original writings. I will be more careful in the future. You can still give your answers within the main thread, thus they don't get lost in this huge thread. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Delaney, Timothy C (Timothy) wrote: Stephen Kellett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes And yet there is not one company that has someone devoted full-time to developing Python. Not even Guido. Who's Guido? LOL Falling off my chair!! See, the problem is that you have to go all the way to the second FAQ in order to find out who Guido is. Obviously it needs to be more prominent on the Python web site. Oh - you mean Ilias didn't actually *read* anything on the Python web site? My bad. Illias - I'm assuming you are not a troll (despite the contrary evidence) and am going to direct you to a site with all the answers you need. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html I know this document. It has no relevance to me. Tim Delaney . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html I know this document. It has no relevance to me. QOTW! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Stephen Kellett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Horsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Stephen Kellett wrote: Who's Guido? LOL Falling off my chair!! I think the expression you are looking for is ROFL! :-) Yes, but with that I could've been standing up before ending up on the floor. I wrote it as I felt it!. Its a really good demonstration as to the depth of the research performed by Illias. I thin I understand what you mean. Guido van Rossum is the project's lead developer. In recognition of this role, he's sometimes jokingly called the Benevolent Dictator For Life, or BDFL; the acronym is occasionally used in python-dev postings, especially in a context such as making that change will require a BDFL pronouncement. In theory the BDFL makes all the decisions about what goes in to Python and what doesn't. source: http://www.python.org/dev/process.html I'm waiting for the Who's Matz? comment in comp.lang.ruby Stephen . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Simon Brunning wrote: On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:23:08 +0200, Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) But if those answers above were of official nature, I must seriously rethink if I can rely on _any_ system which is based on python, as the foundation and the community do not care about essential needs and requirements. I couldn't agree more. You need to find a community that *does* care about essential needs. Might I recommend Perl or Ruby? you can review this thread. [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps? http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/676a2fbaf48046ac Currently, I tend more to python, but I don't think that I can keep my initial enthusiasm up. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Stephen Kellett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes the community do not care about essential needs and requirements. Wrong. They do. They just don't care about *your* essential needs and requirements which *you* want *others* to fulfill at *their* cost. As others have said, do some work yourself. your accousations are false. please review my initial message. Stephen . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Diez B. Roggisch wrote: One of the most funny things within open-source is that switching: first: we have powerfull solutions which beat this and that then: hey, this is just volunteer work I don't see the contradiction here. It beats a great deal of commercial solutions in a lot of ways. But not on every single one of these. And the _reason_ for beating commercial software in certain aspects is exactly that somebody stood up and volunteered. Obviously you aren't interested in the more labour-intensive parts of the os-development. Sometimes the core-team must provide infrastructure for volunteers to contribute (as in this MinGW case). http://lazaridis.com/core/product/case.html But if those answers above were of official nature, I must seriously rethink if I can rely on _any_ system which is based on python, as the foundation and the community do not care about essential needs and requirements. They might not care about _your_ perceived essential needs. But as lots of people use python and python based solutions with great commercial success, you might think of reviewing your needs more critical. After all, there is no _perfect_ system for all needs. MinGW compatibility is not my need. It is an community need. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Stephen Kellett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes The answer to most of your questions is, Because no one has yet volunteered their time and effort to get the job done. this answer do not fit in most questions. please review them again. There you go. Failed the test. He is an AI. A human wouldn't make this mistake. Even an simple AI would detect: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Stephen . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Fredrik Lundh wrote: Pat wrote: A few things. Primarily the fact that I'm not very experienced in C (the extensions that I need to have compiled are not written by me). Secondarily, the fact that the discussion threads I read made it seem much more complicated than what you just described. from two posts at the top of this thread: Writing a setup.py and running python setup.py build_ext --compiler=mingw32 works for me *without* any more work. Things can't get much simpler. and The mingw compiler *is* supported through distutils. distutils can straightforwardly be configured to build extensions with mingw. In my defense, the threads I was referring to were prior to this thread and did not include the two snippets that you've quoted. Besides, there *was* additional work that needed to be done, specifically adding the python23.dll or python24.dll to the \mingw\lib directory, as you mentioned in one of your previous posts. Now, I'm not saying any of this is rocket science, or isn't fairly easy to overcome. But it is a definite stumbling block for someone like myself who is less fluent with C that you are. (now go read Ilias replies to those posts) I'm not Ilias. He'll have to fend for himself. I just happen to have a similar need to understand how to simplify the process of compiling extensions for Python in light of the recent changes with Python 2.4. Third, the fact that some of the code we've tried to compile didn't compile cleanly, the way your cElementTree did (but I can't remember what exactly the problem was and I didn't do the compiling). was that code tested under gcc? code that compiles under visual C doesn't necessarily compile silently under gcc, but fixing that is usually pretty trivial (no worse than porting mostly portable code between platforms). The code was not written by me. Specifically, we are making use of PEAK and the unofficial GPL port of Qt for Windows (not the upcoming GPL version from Trolltech). I just want it to work. ;-) And, finally, an aversion to trial-and-error solutions. I prefer to Google and ask questions when I'm out of my element. sure didn't sound that way when you entered this thread: So in an effort to make some headway, I'm going to try to summarize the current state of affairs. The bottom line is that compiling C extension modules on the Windows platform for Python 2.4 is, today, a royal pain in the ass. Period. Here's why. /.../ Okay, I suppose I could have done a better job phrasing that. I should have said something like in my personal opinion, finding definitive, documented information on the proper way to compile C extensions for Python in light of the recent changes to Python 2.4 is a royal pain in the ass. To that I would now add But Fredrik Lundh thinks things can't get much simpler, and if you ask him nicely he'll show you the error of your ways. ;-) now go download MinGW and figure out what's wrong with your C code. It isn't my C code. I'm only including it as a dependency in my project and trying to make the use of it by my users simpler than could ever be conceived by someone who thinks things can't get much simpler. ;-) if you get stuck, post the error messages, and I'm sure some c.l.pythoneer will help you sort it out. Thanks. In all seriousness, you're posts have helped. When we ran into snags we tried to compile cElementTree, got a bunch of errors, figured out we hadn't copied python23.dll into /mingw/lib, and were able to compile everything we needed. We still haven't tried that for Python 2.4 yet, due to other constraints that we haven't worked out. But I think we are getting closer and your help is greatly appreciated. :-) -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtechhttp://www.orbtech.com Schevo http://www.schevo.org Pypersyst http://www.pypersyst.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW
open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base.
Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to
open source. They are currently trying to port Python to .NET, and when
done they'll retire the current implementation and lock everyone to a
proprietary platform. I know it's hard to believe, but there are clues...
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open source. They are currently trying to port Python to .NET, and when done they'll retire the current implementation and lock everyone to a proprietary platform. I know it's hard to believe, but there are clues... impressive. but things are much simpler. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. mike MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
bruno modulix wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW
open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base.
Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to
open source. They are currently trying to port Python to .NET, and
when done they'll retire the current implementation and lock everyone
to a proprietary platform. I know it's hard to believe, but there are
clues...
impressive.
but things are much simpler.
Could you be more prolific ?
--
bruno desthuilliers
python -c print '@'.join(['.'.join([w[::-1] for w in p.split('.')]) for
p in '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.split('@')])
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. mike MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] And herein lies the beauty of the noble meritocratic free software movement. If the community needs it, a member of said community has both complete unfettered freedom and a supportive environment to make it. Any amount of success at such an endeavor, even a feeble failure of an attempt, would bring kudos the hero who attempts such a feat and possibly organize unfathomable resources in the attendance of such a lofty goal. Make us proud Ilias. But whatever you do, don't beg. Adam DePrince -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Adam DePrince wrote: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] And herein lies the beauty of the noble meritocratic free software movement. If the community needs it, a member of said community has both complete unfettered freedom and a supportive environment to make it. Which is this supportive environment? Any amount of success at such an endeavor, even a feeble failure of an attempt, would bring kudos the hero who attempts such a feat and possibly organize unfathomable resources in the attendance of such a lofty goal. Make us proud Ilias. But whatever you do, don't beg. I don't beg. If you think this, than please reread the thread (or at least the root-trunk) Adam DePrince . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: bruno modulix wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: there are other reasons behind the decision to not support the MinGW open-source-complier directly out of the main source-code base. Yes, of course. The reason is they are lying about their commitment to open source. They are currently trying to port Python to .NET, and when done they'll retire the current implementation and lock everyone to a proprietary platform. I know it's hard to believe, but there are clues... impressive. but things are much simpler. Could you be more prolific ? Please explain the word prolific. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: MinGW compatibility is not my need. Then why do you waste so much effort whining about it not being given to you? It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. mike MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word community. I do not think it means what you think it means. -- Soraia: http://www.soraia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
[Tim Peters] Well, I'm a Director of the Python Software Foundation, and my view is the more platforms the merrier. [Ilias Lazaridis] I extract: you are intrested, that the source-code-base compiles directly with MinGW (and other compilers). Sure, I'm in favor of that. I'm also in favor of world peace, for that matter wink. Thus you should be intrested, that existent patches are incorporated into the source-code-base. That one doesn't follow. It follows that I'd like to see existing patches _reviewed_, but not necessarily that I'd be in favor of incorporating them if I had time to review them myself. The suggested process ist: use of #defines whenever possible, to avoid influence on the existent behaviour of the code. Patches are reviewed on technical merit, balancing the tradeoffs; #defines are actually discouraged when it's possible to do a thing without introducing platform-specific #ifdefs. A problem is that a patch won't get reviewed unless a volunteer does a review, and we've got an increasing backlog of unreviewed patches because of that. The most effective way for a person P to get their patch reviewed now is for P to volunteer to review 5 other patches first. There are a few Python developers who have promised, in return, to review P's patch then. But I'm not paid to work on Python, and I don't have time to volunteer to help MinGW along, so I don't anticipate that I'll do anything here beyond writing this reply. You have done already very much. But should should take some time to evaluate community needs. I don't know what that means, but plausible meanings sound futile. No matter what I think the community needs, it's not going to happen unless somebody else does the work: I can't tell anyone else what to do. Heck, I don't even want to. It sounds like you might want development driven by some kind of marketing study. Nothing wrong with that, if so, but it's not how open source works. An entity like the Python Business Forum would presumably be more open to that tack (although I doubt the PBF would have a natural interest in MinGW). Minority platforms generally don't get far unless a truly dedicated volunteer shows up. For example, Jason Tishler does an excellent job on Python's Cygwin port, as does Andrew MacIntyre on OS/2 EMX, and they've both done so for years. Nobody asked them to do this (AFAIK), it's more that nobody could _stop_ them from doing it. They're motivated by love of the platforms they take care of. In the absence of anyone willing to pay someone else here, that's what's truly needed. ... This effort could be driven by the intrested community members (which obviously exist). Then maybe they need to be better organized, and/or more assertive in pushing their interests. If someone is getting left behind here, they should speak up on the python-dev list. ... Now, can you please tell me the process I have to follow to suggest the following (to the PSF or to the programmers or to the decision takers), possibly to get at least a vote on it: No such thing will happen -- forget that. For MinGW to be supported forever, it's necessary and sufficient that a specific person volunteer to support MinGW forever. If that person goes away, so does the support they provided; it's the same story for Cygwin, and even for Linux and native Windows. A difference is that Linux and native Windows attract more than enough volunteers so that ongoing support seems statistically certain. But, e.g., if Andrew MacIntyre went away, I wouldn't bet on OS/2 EMX support continuing. Please ensure that the source-code-base compliles directly with MinGW. The suggested process is to: * provide the infrastructure (e.g. mailinglist, issue- tracking-category,... ) * Notify the community about this subproject to channelise efforts * include existing MinGW specific patches * ensure future verificatioin of changes, * optimal:due to an automated build-system * or simpler: due to community-feedback If a specific person or group wants to volunteer to do all that, year after year, they can start doing it today. The PSF won't do any of it (although the PSF will fund and arrange to run the Python website, and one way or another supply a bug tracker, source-control system, and other infrastructure for keeping the Python project as a whole running). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word community. I do not think it means what you think it means. The community is everyone around python (including me at this moment). We could call i userbase, too, but one needs not to be a actual user to be a community member. what do you think about? . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 14:25, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Adam DePrince wrote: On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 13:29, Ilias Lazaridis wrote: Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] And herein lies the beauty of the noble meritocratic free software movement. If the community needs it, a member of said community has both complete unfettered freedom and a supportive environment to make it. Which is this supportive environment? You're on it. You drive a car? You have to treat it right to get what you want, right? Same here. Ask correctly, and you will get your answers. Any amount of success at such an endeavor, even a feeble failure of an attempt, would bring kudos the hero who attempts such a feat and possibly organize unfathomable resources in the attendance of such a lofty goal. Make us proud Ilias. But whatever you do, don't beg. I don't beg. Really, remember this: My questions: a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? Many languages have the notion of the rhetorical question. Also known as the loaded question. Your statement comes across partly as a challenge, partly as a demand. In English, American English at least, if you want to challenge somebody over a perceived failure ask them why they didn't do it. English language culutres tend to be very metrocratic. American history glorifies the self capable (and somewhat violent) cowboy. Austrians have their love of daisy cutting. I could go on, but language carriers its own cultural barriers. You didn't intent to, but you begging. Sure, you save some face by not obviously groveling, but that only makes the slight worse. Now somebody asked that you to read http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html. Read it in its entirety, and come back later. Now I have the *real* reason that they didn't do this. Nobody cares, except for you. If you care enough, make the binary package yourself and give it to the community. Take home the source, compile it, get it working, and *you* can become the hero of the Python Foundation that provides this service. Being that you have a need, if the binaries you want don't just appear, it can either be assumed that you don't care enough, or have the ability to do the work yourself. Even if you fail miserably, come back, tell us what you tried, how you failed, and the denizens of this site will happily (try to) guide you. Good luck getting what you want by trolling. Adam DePrince -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
On 2005-02-15, Adam DePrince [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You didn't intent to, but you begging. Sure, you save some face by not obviously groveling, but that only makes the slight worse. Now somebody asked that you to read http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html. Read it in its entirety, and come back later. The wanker already stated that the smart questions essay doesn't apply to him. I think he may be right: it only applies to people who actually want questions answered and problems solved. I don't think he wants to do/solve/answer anything. He just wants to piss and moan about how nobody will jump when he tells them to. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I always liked FLAG at DAY!! visi.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Adam DePrince wrote: [...] If the community needs it, a member of said community has both complete unfettered freedom and a supportive environment to make it. Which is this supportive environment? You're on it. You drive a car? You have to treat it right to get what you want, right? Same here. Ask correctly, and you will get your answers. Your interpretation/definition of asking correctly is irrelevant to me. [...] Make us proud Ilias. But whatever you do, don't beg. I don't beg. Really, remember this: My questions: a) Why does the Python Foundation not provide additionally a binary version, compiled with MinGW or another open-source compiler? Many languages have the notion of the rhetorical question. Also [...] - (faulty interpretations, suggesting processing model) no comments. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mike Meyer wrote: It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. It is an community need [at least partially] Repeating a falsehood will not make it true. Can you offer anything besides your own whining to back this claim up? mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word community. I do not think it means what you think it means. The community is everyone around python (including me at this moment). Then clearly, MingW is *not* a community need. I'm around Python. That makes me part of the community by your definition. I have no need for MingW (in fact, it doesn't run on anything I do development on). Ergo, MingW is not a community need. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mike Meyer wrote: It is an community need. Based on the evidence at hand, this is a false statement. It is an community need [at least partially] Repeating a falsehood will not make it true. Can you offer anything besides your own whining to back this claim up? please review my initial posting. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [EVALUATION] - E02 - Support for MinGW Open Source Compiler
Mike Meyer wrote: Ilias Lazaridis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Joe Francia wrote: Ilias Lazaridis wrote: [...] MinGW compatibility is not [only] my need. It is an community need [at least partially] You keep using that word community. I do not think it means what you think it means. The community is everyone around python (including me at this moment). Then clearly, MingW is *not* a community need. I'm around Python. That makes me part of the community by your definition. I have no need for MingW (in fact, it doesn't run on anything I do development on). Ergo, MingW is not a community need. I see. Time to close this thread. Nothing essential anymore. . -- http://lazaridis.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
