Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. You'll find that many people will be very skeptical wrt. this story: this kind of thing really isn't supposed to happen, and it's difficult to believe that it failed just because of the one-character change. You already said that that the change was adding a minus sign somewhere. Can you now kindly also report what then the problem was that your partner encountered (specific error message would be appreciated). A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. It's a lot of manual labor only the first time. When you package the next version of the same software, manual labor should be minimal. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com writes: Yes, code reversal programs have been around for many, many decades. Try one on MS Word or Adobe Acrobat. :-) Interesting examples. What “important stuff” from those programs has not been “ripped off”, to use your terms? Is there anything remaining in those programs which others would find sufficiently valuable that has *not* been “ripped off”? -- \ “If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; | `\ but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.” —Donald | _o__) Robert Perry Marquis | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:28 AM, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: On 8/5/2010 7:45 PM, geremy condra wrote: On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, W. eWatsonwolftra...@invalid.com wrote: In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability seems an issue. As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. Portability doesn't mean you can use different versions of your dependencies and be A-OK. It should be fairly obvious that if the behavior of your dependencies changes, your code needs to change to ensure that it demonstrates the same behavior. Portability also doesn't mean that any given one-character change is valid, so that may be your issue as well. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. What, why were you compiling a program? And why not just use distutils? Geremy Condra I checked the one char change on my system thoroughly. I looked around on some forums and NGs 4 months ago, and found no one even had a simple compiled program available to even demonstrate some simple example. I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. And what was hard to do with Py2Exe? i used it on relatively complex college work using QT and the worse i had to do was include a sip option to make Py2Exe work with PyQT. But the setup.py script that generates the .exe (automatically) was ridiculously small and simple ( https://svn.inf.ufsc.br/katcipis/python/FormaisGUI/src/setup.py). For me compiling a python program into an .exe always was pretty easy (already made it at my work with a prototype, that one was quite complex, i just had some problem with the netifaces module). So how does one keep a non-Python user in lock step with my setup, so these problems don't arise? I don't even want to think about having him uninstall and re-install. :-) Although maybe he could do it without making matters worse. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://www.getgnulinux.org/windows -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. distutils. http://docs.python.org/library/distutils.html I don't see ;how distutils is going to solve this problem. Are you suggesting the program should be packaged? Why? I can just send it to him as py code. distutils looks like it's for library modules, e.g., functions like math. So how does one keep a non-Python user in lock step with my setup, so these problems don't arise? I don't even want to think about having him uninstall and re-install. :-) Although maybe he could do it without making matters worse. That's going to hinge on what your dependencies are. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
W. eWatson wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. Yes, but he won't tell for fear of getting ripped off of his knowledge. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
I can't respond to otten directly, since he uses gmane. Here's my response. W. eWatson wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. Ott wrote? Yes, but he won't tell for fear of getting ripped off of his knowledge. Who won't tell? Why would I send you the py code, for example, if I wanted to protect it because of its importance? I'd put it in exe form and send it and allow you to input data to produce the desired result of the program. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
W. eWatson wrote: I can't respond to otten directly, since he uses gmane. Here's my response. W. eWatson wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. Ott wrote? Yes, but he won't tell for fear of getting ripped off of his knowledge. Who won't tell? The the guy who knows how to distribute the source code without having it ripped off... Seriously, I try to make a joke once in a while, usually with devastating results. The idea you were meant to take away was that once you start thinking about a protection scheme there is always a next step until you reach the point where your software, say, is completely safe, but also completely unusable. Had Guido started the language in that mindset there would be no Python for you to worry about its ripp-off safety. Why would I send you the py code, for example, if I wanted to protect it because of its importance? Because if you think again you may find that it's not as important as you think? I'd put it in exe form and send it and allow you to input data to produce the desired result of the program. There is no analog in python, and if you cannot concentrate on your honest customers the only option that offers reasonable safety would be to turn your application into web service. Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:00 AM, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. I've never seen a code obfuscation scheme I thought did the job the whole way, including compiling C, and Python bytecode is significantly easier to turn back into something resembling the original source (YMMV, I suppose). Also, if you don't know about common tools like distutils, the odds are pretty good that it isn't your code itself that is valuable to you- you're probably more interested in protecting your idea about what the code should do. At least for now, that's outside of the scope of technical solutions- discuss it with a lawyer, not a programmer. disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. distutils. http://docs.python.org/library/distutils.html I don't see ;how distutils is going to solve this problem. Are you suggesting the program should be packaged? Why? I can just send it to him as py code. distutils looks like it's for library modules, e.g., functions like math. ...no. Distutils is handy because you could just bundle your dependencies and hand them an easy-to-install package, which would be a quick way to get everybody on the same page. Of course, depending on the licenses those dependencies are under you might want to do even more talking to a lawyer than I've previously suggested before you go about trying to sell that bundle- I'm sure you wouldn't want to 'rip off' great free projects like python and numpy. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On 8/6/2010 9:03 AM, Peter Otten wrote: ... Seriously, I try to make a joke once in a while, usually with devastating results. The idea you were meant to take away was that once you start thinking about a protection scheme there is always a next step until you reach the point where your software, say, is completely safe, but also completely unusable. Had Guido started the language in that mindset there would be no Python for you to worry about its ripp-off safety. Why would I send you the py code, for example, if I wanted to protect it because of its importance? Because if you think again you may find that it's not as important as you think? I'd put it in exe form and send it and allow you to input data to produce the desired result of the program. There is no analog in python, and if you cannot concentrate on your honest customers the only option that offers reasonable safety would be to turn your application into web service. Peter So you think Python is part of open software in terms of distributing a product? So I should stick to C, where one can distribute programs w/o revealing code details, and having a customer compile the code? It's been awhile since I've used Linux or Unix, but I think there's a lot of commercial code out there dependent upon it, and the users do not have to compile anything. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On 8/6/2010 10:31 AM, geremy condra wrote: On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:00 AM, W. eWatsonwolftra...@invalid.com wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. I've never seen a code obfuscation scheme I thought did the job the whole way, including compiling C, and Python bytecode is significantly easier to turn back into something resembling the original source (YMMV, I suppose). Also, if you don't know about common tools like distutils, the odds are pretty good that it isn't your code itself that is valuable to you- you're probably more interested in protecting your idea about what the code should do. At least for now, that's outside of the scope of technical solutions- discuss it with a lawyer, not a programmer. disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. distutils. http://docs.python.org/library/distutils.html I don't see ;how distutils is going to solve this problem. Are you suggesting the program should be packaged? Why? I can just send it to him as py code. distutils looks like it's for library modules, e.g., functions like math. ...no. Distutils is handy because you could just bundle your dependencies and hand them an easy-to-install package, which would be a quick way to get everybody on the same page. Of course, depending on the licenses those dependencies are under you might want to do even more talking to a lawyer than I've previously suggested before you go about trying to sell that bundle- I'm sure you wouldn't want to 'rip off' great free projects like python and numpy. Geremy Condra Yes, code reversal programs have been around for many, many decades. Try one on MS Word or Adobe Acrobat. :-) Is there a complete illustration of using disutils? Our only dependencies are on Python Org material. We use no commercial or licensed code. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
W. eWatson wrote: So you think Python is part of open software in terms of distributing a product? So I should stick to C, where one can distribute programs w/o revealing code details, and having a customer compile the code? It's No, I'm trying to make you reconsider what you're going to protect rather than how. Aren't your customers more interested in using your software rather than tinker with it? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Aug 5, 9:50 pm, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability seems an issue. As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. I'm curious: what was the one character change? And does your original program still work for him? Why did he install a different version of numpy if things were working for him? By the way, posting x doesn't work on a forum never gets you any help, because clairvoyance is not real :D. Posting actual error messages sample code does. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. As someone mentioned, you don't compile anything in Python. You can make a .exe file, though, using, as you know, py2exe. I find using GUI2Exe (which requires you have wxPython) to make things much easier and then if you want to be even fancier, use InnoSetup to make an installer. Once you get a working script in py2exe/GUI2Exe, it is usually a snap to make a new version of your .exe after changing your code a bit. As far as then updating your .exe files with your non-Python friends, you should search this newsgroup for Esky, which seems like a very nice idea for doing this very thing. Che -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. I'm curious: what was the one character change? And does your original program still work for him? Why did he install a different version of numpy if things were working for him? By the way, posting x doesn't work on a forum never gets you any help, because clairvoyance is not real :D. Posting actual error messages sample code does. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. As someone mentioned, you don't compile anything in Python. You can make a .exe file, though, using, as you know, py2exe. I find using GUI2Exe (which requires you have wxPython) to make things much easier and then if you want to be even fancier, use InnoSetup to make an installer. Once you get a working script in py2exe/GUI2Exe, it is usually a snap to make a new version of your .exe after changing your code a bit. As far as then updating your .exe files with your non-Python friends, you should search this newsgroup for Esky, which seems like a very nice idea for doing this very thing. Che -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:58 AM, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: Is there a complete illustration of using disutils? Our only dependencies are on Python Org material. We use no commercial or licensed code. http://tinyurl.com/3yhwjfj Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 08:00:55 -0700, W. eWatson wrote: I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? That someone must know how to distribute them without having the source code ripped off. That's what copyright law is for. If you think that distributing object code (instead of source code) is going to deter a serious hacker, you're deluded. Besides, I don't mean to be rude, but what makes you think anyone would care about stealing your code? If you think people are interested in stealing your code, you're almost certainly wrong. The world is full of coders who think their two-bit text editor or re-implementation of PacMan is the most precious, precious software in existence. The vast majority of them are wrong. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 10:35:38 -0700, W. eWatson wrote: So you think Python is part of open software in terms of distributing a product? Python itself *is* open source software. It doesn't *require* you to write open source software. So I should stick to C, where one can distribute programs w/o revealing code details No you can't. That's the point that you are missing. When you ship a compiled exe, you are still shipping code, and anyone serious about ripping off your ideas will not find that even the tiniest barrier to doing so. Microsoft never ship their code to Windows, and yet virus and malware authors regularly and rapidly analyse it well enough to not only work out what it does and how it does it, but to discover vulnerabilities that even Microsoft don't know about. If MS can't protect their code, what makes you think your .exe file is going to any better protected? -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:50:14 -0700, W. eWatson wrote: As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. What does that mean? It crashes? It raises an exception? He double-clicks on it and nothing happens? What error does he get? What was the one character change? Have you tested it and are you sure it works, or are you just assuming it works? What OS are you using? How did you send it to him? Can he open the file in a text editor, and what does he see? A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. I'm sorry, I don't fully understand what you think this is going to accomplish. A program compiled to object code is going to be dependent on the hardware platform, the operating system, and any libraries that may or may not be installed. Most likely the *exact* version of the libraries. Do the words DLL Hell mean anything to you? How is that an advantage of Python's source-code distribution? -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 10:58:24 -0700, W. eWatson wrote: Is there a complete illustration of using disutils? Our only dependencies are on Python Org material. We use no commercial or licensed code. Oh my, the sheer ignorance that sentence reveals. Python and the standard library *is* licensed. I mean, good grief, when you start up Python's interpreter, it even says: Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. Similarly any C compiler you use will also be licensed. If it's not, you have no right to use it! (Unless you can find a public domain compiler, which I doubt exists, and even if one does, I doubt it will be very good.) -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability seems an issue. As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. Portability doesn't mean you can use different versions of your dependencies and be A-OK. It should be fairly obvious that if the behavior of your dependencies changes, your code needs to change to ensure that it demonstrates the same behavior. Portability also doesn't mean that any given one-character change is valid, so that may be your issue as well. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. What, why were you compiling a program? And why not just use distutils? Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On 8/5/2010 7:45 PM, geremy condra wrote: On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, W. eWatsonwolftra...@invalid.com wrote: In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability seems an issue. As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. Portability doesn't mean you can use different versions of your dependencies and be A-OK. It should be fairly obvious that if the behavior of your dependencies changes, your code needs to change to ensure that it demonstrates the same behavior. Portability also doesn't mean that any given one-character change is valid, so that may be your issue as well. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. What, why were you compiling a program? And why not just use distutils? Geremy Condra I checked the one char change on my system thoroughly. I looked around on some forums and NGs 4 months ago, and found no one even had a simple compiled program available to even demonstrate some simple example. I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. So how does one keep a non-Python user in lock step with my setup, so these problems don't arise? I don't even want to think about having him uninstall and re-install. :-) Although maybe he could do it without making matters worse. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Portability--Not very portable?
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:28 PM, W. eWatson wolftra...@invalid.com wrote: On 8/5/2010 7:45 PM, geremy condra wrote: On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 6:50 PM, W. eWatsonwolftra...@invalid.com wrote: In my on-again-off-again experience with Python for 18 months, portability seems an issue. As an example, my inexperienced Python partner 30 miles away has gotten out of step somehow. I think by installing a different version of numpy than I use. I gave him a program we both use months ago, and he had no trouble. (We both use IDLE on 2.5). I made a one character change to it and sent him the new py file. He can't execute it. I doubt he has changed anything in the intervening period. Portability doesn't mean you can use different versions of your dependencies and be A-OK. It should be fairly obvious that if the behavior of your dependencies changes, your code needs to change to ensure that it demonstrates the same behavior. Portability also doesn't mean that any given one-character change is valid, so that may be your issue as well. A further example. Months ago I decided to see if I could compile a program to avoid such problems as above. I planned to satisfy that need, and see if I could distribute some simple programs to non-Python friends. I pretty well understand the idea,and got it working with a small program. It seemed like a lot of manual labor to do it. What, why were you compiling a program? And why not just use distutils? Geremy Condra I checked the one char change on my system thoroughly. I looked around on some forums and NGs 4 months ago, and found no one even had a simple compiled program available to even demonstrate some simple example. That would be because Python is an interpreted language. I would think there are some small time and big time Python players who sell executable versions of their programs for profit? Yes. What's your point? disutils. Sounds familiar. I'm pretty sure I was using Py2Exe, and disutils might have been part of it. distutils. http://docs.python.org/library/distutils.html So how does one keep a non-Python user in lock step with my setup, so these problems don't arise? I don't even want to think about having him uninstall and re-install. :-) Although maybe he could do it without making matters worse. That's going to hinge on what your dependencies are. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
