Re: [Distutils] Source code for wrapper EXEs

On 23 January 2016 at 23:32, Ionel Cristian Mărieș wrote: > These are the sources: > https://bitbucket.org/pypa/setuptools/src/tip/launcher.c And the distil launchers (used by pip for wheel installs) are at https://bitbucket.org/vinay.sajip/simple_launcher Paul

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Chris Barker wrote: > OK, > > I'll try to stop being emotional here :-) > >> 2016-01-22 3:47 GMT+01:00 Chris Barker - NOAA Federal >> : >> > >> > I'm skeptical because I >> > tried to to that for years for OS-X and it

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

> On Jan 24, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > Maybe we need wheel-builders-sig? Their mandate would be to hash out > things like how to build binary-libraries-wrapped-up-in-wheels, share > knowledge about the minutiae of linker behavior on different platforms > (oh

Re: [Distutils] Changing the way we use the PEP process (redux)

On 22 January 2016 at 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote: > I've posted about this idea to the list before, but this time I've > finally started working on it and have a concrete plan to discuss :) > > The basic idea: > > * I want to progressively move the active interoperability >

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

On 25 January 2016 at 08:32, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> If the aim is to bring Linux wheel support in line with Windows and >> Mac OS X, then rather than defining a *new* compatibility tag (which >> would

Re: [Distutils] Changing the way we use the PEP process (redux)

On 25 January 2016 at 13:30, Donald Stufft wrote: > Will we start moving the actual specifications into packaging.python.org, or > will they stay in the PEP repository? I’m not sure I can tell from your two > PRs currently. The initial PRs are aimed more at documenting the

Re: [Distutils] Changing the way we use the PEP process (redux)

Will we start moving the actual specifications into packaging.python.org, or will they stay in the PEP repository? I’m not sure I can tell from your two PRs currently. > On Jan 24, 2016, at 9:04 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 22 January 2016 at 16:58, Nick Coghlan

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

On 25 January 2016 at 10:23, Donald Stufft wrote: > >> On Jan 24, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> Maybe we need wheel-builders-sig? Their mandate would be to hash out >> things like how to build binary-libraries-wrapped-up-in-wheels, share >>

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

On 24 January 2016 at 12:31, Robert T. McGibbon wrote: > On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Chris Barker wrote: >> >> 1) each package that needs a third partly lib statically links it in. >> 2) each package that needs a third partly lib provides it,

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

> On Jan 24, 2016, at 7:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 24 January 2016 at 12:31, Robert T. McGibbon wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Chris Barker wrote: >>> >>> 1) each package that needs a third partly lib

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 24 January 2016 at 12:31, Robert T. McGibbon wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Chris Barker wrote: >>> >>> 1) each package that needs a third partly lib statically

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

> On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:32 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > The one thing that does give me pause is that whenever we *do* decide > to switch to manylinux2, then it's going to be a big drag to wait for > a whole pip release/upgrade cycle -- Debian unstable is still shipping > pip

Re: [Distutils] draft PEP: manylinux1

> On Jan 24, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > ... the excellent Barry Warsaw ... Distro work is often thankless (especially here) so I just wanted to echo this: glory to the FLUFL, may his reign be <> short. -glyph___