> In conversation with Dan, I have fixed my conda package (but overwritten
the same version). I needed to add this to the build:
>
> # sudo apt-get install gcc-multilib
> CC='gcc -m32' make python
Thanks. That fixes it for me as well. I never even looked at intobject.c,
since it compiled out of t
In conversation with Dan, I have fixed my conda package (but overwritten
the same version). I needed to add this to the build:
# sudo apt-get install gcc-multilib
CC='gcc -m32' make python
I don't have 32-bit headers by default anymore on my distro. With that
change, I can run:
% conda install
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 9:39 PM David Mertz wrote:
> As Skip pointed out to me privately, there are some minor limitations with
> this version. E.g.:
>
> % python
> >>> import glob
> >>> import sys
> >>> print 'hello'
> hello
> >>> print 2+2
> 4
> >>> print 2*2
> Unhandled exception: run-time er
I've provided this excellent language interpreter as a conda package. For
users of conda, you can install it (on Linux) with:
conda install -c davidmertz python=0.9
(perhaps put it in a different environment than base).
I'm embarrassed by how much effort that took me. I used to teach
conda-
Will someone publish an manylinux build to conda-forge (or their own
channel)?
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 9:15 PM Dan Stromberg wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:02 AM Paul Sokolovsky
> wrote:
>
>> I think to resolve this issue to the completion, and avoid possibility
>> of an intermediary to
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:02 AM Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> I think to resolve this issue to the completion, and avoid possibility
> of an intermediary to add any unexpected changes/mistakes to the
> original sources, instead of "someone making a tarball", someone should
> make a script, which repr
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 10:10 AM Larry Hastings wrote:
> Call me crazy, but... shouldn't they be checked in? I thought we literally
> had every revision going back to day zero. It should be duck soup to
> recreate the original sources--all you need is the correct revision number.
It seems to
On 2/17/21 4:45 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should
put them up under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
Call me crazy, but... shouldn't they be checked in? I thought we
literally had every revision going back to day zero. It /s
On 18.02.2021 09:16, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> On 18.02.2021 01:45, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should put
>> them up
>> under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
>
> There is already a page with Andrew's build on python.org:
>
> https://
On 18.02.2021 01:45, Brett Cannon wrote:
> If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should put them
> up
> under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
There is already a page with Andrew's build on python.org:
https://www.python.org/download/releases/early/
but it's not l
Hello,
On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 18:53:46 -0600
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> > If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we
> > should put them up under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
>
> Did that earlier today:
>
> https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/issues/1734
I think t
> If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should put them
> up under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
Did that earlier today:
https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/issues/1734
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-de
If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should put
them up under the Python org on GitHub for posterity.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 6:10 AM Skip Montanaro
wrote:
> This is getting a bit more off-topic for python-dev than I'd like. I
> will make a couple comments though, then h
This is getting a bit more off-topic for python-dev than I'd like. I
will make a couple comments though, then hopefully be done with this
thread.
> The original ones are here:
> http://ftp.fi.netbsd.org/pub/misc/archive/alt.sources/volume91/Feb/
> Look at http://ftp.fi.netbsd.org/pub/misc/archive/
On 17.02.2021 08:00, Stefan Ring wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 7:33 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 05:49:49PM -0600, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>>
>>> If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what Google
>>> published, let me know.
>>
>> I don't have
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 7:33 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 05:49:49PM -0600, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>
> > If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what Google
> > published, let me know.
>
> I don't have those, but I do have a copy of Python 0.9.1 with u
It was not that bad, though:
https://github.com/smontanaro/python-0.9.1/compare/main...Ringdingcoder:original
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3
> When I see diffs like this (your git vs. the unshar result) I tend to
> trust unshar more:
Sorry, it was not you. I meant the github repo from this e-mail thread.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pyth
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 7:33 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 05:49:49PM -0600, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>
> > If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what Google
> > published, let me know.
>
> I don't have those, but I do have a copy of Python 0.9.1 with u
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 05:49:49PM -0600, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what Google
> published, let me know.
I don't have those, but I do have a copy of Python 0.9.1 with unmangled
scripts.
$ ls -lh Python-0.9.1.tar.gz
-rwxr-xr-x 1 steve
> Also mind
> http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/diary/archive/2009/03/27/python_0_9_1p1.html
> for result comparison.
Thanks, Paul. I had lost track of Andrew. Good to know he's still out
there. I wonder why his tar file was never sucked up into the
historical releases page.
Whew! My stupid
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 5:02 PM Skip Montanaro wrot
> A note to webmas...@python.org from an astute user named Hiromi in Japan*
> referred us to Guido's shell archives for the 0.9.1 release from 1991.
Very interesting discovery! In my efforts to uncover the original
plaintext usenet post, I stum
Hello,
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:22:00 -0600
Skip Montanaro wrote:
> > If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what
> > Google published, let me know.
>
> Seems the original shar is there buried in a Javascript string toward
> the end of the file. I think I've got a handle
> If someone knows how to get the original Usenet messages from what Google
> published, let me know.
Seems the original shar is there buried in a Javascript string toward
the end of the file. I think I've got a handle on it, though it will
take a Python script to massage back into correct format
>
> Wow. Was white-space not significant in this release of Python? I see the
>> lack of indentation in the first Python programs.
>>
>
> Indentation most certainly was significant from day 0. I suspect what
> happened is that these files got busted somehow by the extraction process
> used by Skip
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 2:59 PM Senthil Kumaran wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:58 PM Skip Montanaro
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I then pushed the result to a Github repo:
>>
>> https://github.com/smontanaro/python-0.9.1
>>
>
> Wow. Was white-space not significant in this release of Python? I see the
>
On 2/16/21 3:44 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Awesome, Skip!
Was there a date somewhere? I can't recall if this would have been the
first open source release (from just about 30 years ago, sometime in
February 1991) or some time later in the same year?
Guido van Rossum
unread,
Python 0.9.1 part
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:58 PM Skip Montanaro
wrote:
>
> I then pushed the result to a Github repo:
>
> https://github.com/smontanaro/python-0.9.1
>
Wow. Was white-space not significant in this release of Python? I see the
lack of indentation in the first Python programs.
__
Awesome, Skip!
Was there a date somewhere? I can't recall if this would have been the
first open source release (from just about 30 years ago, sometime in
February 1991) or some time later in the same year?
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:57 PM Skip Montanaro
wrote:
> A note to webmas...@python.org f
29 matches
Mail list logo
