Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com writes:
* ship a tool for creating an executable pyz or pyzw file from a
directory of pure-Python files
This could be a variant of my pyzzer.py tool:
https://gist.github.com/vsajip/5276787
It doesn't print warnings for extensions or byte-compile anything,
On Mar 29, 2013 4:12 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
WinZip will ignore anything in the front of the file since the zip
directory doesn't reference it. The #! shebang is for Unix, would
point to the correct
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
WinZip will ignore anything in the front of the file since the zip
directory doesn't reference it. The #! shebang is for Unix, would
point to the correct Python, and the +x flag would make it executable.
The mini PEP is for
Would pyzw be much better than reading the shebang line for Windows?
On Mar 29, 2013 4:11 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
WinZip will ignore anything in the front of the file since the zip
directory doesn't
On 28 March 2013 11:40, Philippe Ombredanne pombreda...@nexb.com wrote:
This is not a zip, not an egg, not a wheel but some egg-in-py,
zip-in-py or wheel-in-py and is similar to a shar shell archive.
My point was that on the one hand, I like the fact that everything is
self contained in one
If it was distributed as such virtualenv could read blobs out of its
own zip file, use the get_data() API to read non-module, or add
subdirectories inside its zip file to sys.path
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 March 2013 11:40, Philippe Ombredanne
On 28 March 2013 12:26, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
The launcher will be updated to understand this format and Python will
register this filename association when it is installed.
The launcher should need no changes. The Python msi installer would
need a change to register the new
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 March 2013 12:26, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
The launcher will be updated to understand this format and Python will
register this filename association when it is installed.
The launcher should need no
On 28 March 2013 12:45, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 March 2013 12:26, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
The launcher will be updated to understand this format and Python will
register this filename
From: Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com
Yes, my point was that Vinay's usage could be covered by distributing
distil as a zip file. All it is doing is decoding it's blob of data
(which is an encoded zip file) and then adding the resulting zip to
sys.path.
[snip]
I hope that embedded binary
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Vinay Sajip vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
From: Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com
Yes, my point was that Vinay's usage could be covered by distributing
distil as a zip file. All it is doing is decoding it's blob of data
(which is an encoded zip file) and then
On 28 March 2013 13:11, Vinay Sajip vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I don't know if it's that important to distinguish between the two. I found
the approach I'm using with distil to be a tad more flexible in my case. A
runnable zip has the advantage that it's harder to tinker with, but with
From: Philippe Ombredanne pombreda...@nexb.com
On the other hand, I find it somewhat discomforting as an emerging
best way to package and distribute self-contained bootstrap scripts.
But what is the root cause of that discomfort? The distil approach is slightly
more discoverable than a
From: Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com
Also if you are looking for tweakability you can run a directory with
the same contents of the .zip exactly the same as if it was a zip.
Sure, but my smoke testing involved copying the tweaked distil.py to a network
share, then running that file from other
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Vinay Sajip vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
From: Philippe Ombredanne pombreda...@nexb.com
On the other hand, I find it somewhat discomforting as an emerging
best way to package and distribute self-contained bootstrap scripts.
Virtualenv does it, distil is
Not really trying to tell Vinay to rewrite his script, but IMHO if you
expect it unzip is a lot easier than
file.write(module.random_attribute.decode('base64')). The runnable zip
feature is awesome, not well enough known, and totally worth promoting
over the shar pattern; with some minimal tooling
Philippe Ombredanne pombredanne at nexb.com writes:
Conceptually I find these no different from setup.py scripts, and
these have been mostly normalized (or at the minimum have a
conventional name and a conventional if not specified interface.)
Except that you programmatically interface (to
Daniel Holth dholth at gmail.com writes:
file.write(module.random_attribute.decode('base64')). The runnable zip
feature is awesome, not well enough known, and totally worth promoting
over the shar pattern; with some minimal tooling you'd be good to go.
Runnable zips sound great - I
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
And, I'm almost certain that most if not all existing ZIP tools on Windows
will fail to open files with a shebang, since they've never had to deal with
them.
Actually, the opposite is true, at least for 3rd-party
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:49 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
And, I'm almost certain that most if not all existing ZIP tools on Windows
will fail to open files with a shebang, since they've never had to
Daniel Holth wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:49 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
And, I'm almost certain that most if not all existing ZIP tools on
Windows will fail to open files with a shebang, since
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Daniel Holth wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:49 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com
wrote:
And, I'm almost certain that most if not all
22 matches
Mail list logo
