Bugbee, Larry wrote:
> Is there a reason why Python.exe cannot be built using gcc instead
> of Visual Studio?
>
> It seems building everything with gcc would get around the problem
> of having to match VS versions.
As I understand it, the problem isn't the compiler so much
as the stdio library
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> The Windows builds are hidden in the development section. It took me 10
>> minutes to find them because I was searching in the download section and
>> for nightly builds. The *daily* builds are available at
>> http://www.python.org/dev/daily-msi/
>
> The builds occur 11:00
osoft library? I dunno,
I gotta ask.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: "Martin v. Löwis" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 1:10 PM
To: Christian Heimes
Cc: Bill Janssen; Bugbee, Larry; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6
> The Windows builds are hidden in the development section. It took me 10
> minutes to find them because I was searching in the download section and
> for nightly builds. The *daily* builds are available at
> http://www.python.org/dev/daily-msi/
The builds occur 11:00 UTC (2.5), 12:00 UTC (2.6) an
> Do you have an opinion on the initial proposal of applink.c? The
> proposal does neither seem harmful nor problematic but I also don't see
> how it is going to help the op.
The specific change isn't going to help. What could help is the
inclusion of applink.c into dl_nt.c.
This is not about so
> If not, I'd like to encourage its inclusion. Doing so will permit
> Python to be used with OpenSSL 0.9.8x on Windows platforms without a
> user trying to find somebody with the right compiler to rebuild a Python
> for him/her. This is needed for M2Crypto, or any other OpenSSL wrapper
> for that
From: Bill Janssen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:14 AM
To: Bugbee, Larry
Cc: Christian Heimes; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Python 2.6 and 3.0 ...and applink.c?
> I personally have not used _ssl but on quick inspection I don't see
> a
> Bill Janssen wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Do you have an opinion on the initial proposal of applink.c? The
> proposal does neither seem harmful nor problematic but I also don't see
> how it is going to help the op.
>
> Christian
I know nothing about it -- it's a Windows thing. But reading the note
at
Bill Janssen wrote:
[snip]
Do you have an opinion on the initial proposal of applink.c? The
proposal does neither seem harmful nor problematic but I also don't see
how it is going to help the op.
Christian
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.o
> I don't understand how applink is going to help you. The SSL libs are
statically linked > into the _ssl extension DLL.
I personally have not used _ssl but on quick inspection I don't see any
of the crypto algorithms implemented, AES, ECDSA, etc. What if we want
to encrypt or sign content using
> I personally have not used _ssl but on quick inspection I don't see any
> of the crypto algorithms implemented, AES, ECDSA, etc. What if we want
> to encrypt or sign content using OpenSSL?
I suggested adding a class which gives you access to those. I think
it's a good idea, and that serious us
> I don't understand how applink is going to help you. The SSL libs are
statically linked > into the _ssl extension DLL.
I personally have not used _ssl but on quick inspection I don't see any
of the crypto algorithms implemented, AES, ECDSA, etc. What if we want
to encrypt or sign content using
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> That would be find with me. Where are those Windows binaries available
> for download from?
The Windows builds are hidden in the development section. It took me 10
minutes to find them because I was searching in the download section and
for nightly builds. The *daily* builds
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 25, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> From the follow ups, it sounds like others can pitch in here. A
>> question though: is it reasonable to hold up the monthly release
>> because
>> a binary build we're goi
Bugbee, Larry wrote:
> Hi Barry,
>
> A question Do you know if OpenSSL's applink.c will be included in
> the Windows builds? If so, and I hope it is, great!
>
> If not, I'd like to encourage its inclusion. Doing so will permit
> Python to be used with OpenSSL 0.9.8x on Windows platforms
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> From the follow ups, it sounds like others can pitch in here. A
> question though: is it reasonable to hold up the monthly release because
> a binary build we're going to make available can't be done at the same
> time?
>
> My preference (at least for the alphas) is "no". I
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Bugbee, Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Barry,
>
> A question Do you know if OpenSSL's applink.c will be included in
> the Windows builds? If so, and I hope it is, great!
>
> If not, I'd like to encourage its inclusion.
The best way to encourage its
Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Feb 24, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
>>> It very well might. See Christian Heimes's follow up re: Windows
>>> builds. OTOH, I'm okay if at least for the alphas, the binary
>>> builds lag behind the source releases, though I'd like
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Larry,
On Feb 25, 2008, at 5:20 PM, Bugbee, Larry wrote:
> A question Do you know if OpenSSL's applink.c will be included in
> the Windows builds? If so, and I hope it is, great!
Honestly, I have no idea! I don't have any Windows machines
Hi Barry,
A question Do you know if OpenSSL's applink.c will be included in
the Windows builds? If so, and I hope it is, great!
If not, I'd like to encourage its inclusion. Doing so will permit
Python to be used with OpenSSL 0.9.8x on Windows platforms without a
user trying to find someb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 24, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> I'd also like for us to consider doing regular monthly releases.
>> Several other FLOSS projects I'm involved with are doing this to very
>> good success. The nice thing is
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I'd also like for us to consider doing regular monthly releases.
> Several other FLOSS projects I'm involved with are doing this to very
> good success. The nice thing is that everyone knows well in advance
> when the next release is going to happen, and so all developers and
[Barry]
> I'd also like for us to consider doing regular monthly releases.
+1
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone,
I've volunteered to be the release manager for Python 2.6 and 3.0.
It's been several years since I've RM'd a Python release, and I'm
happy to do it again (he says while the medication is still
working :). I would like to get the n
24 matches
Mail list logo
