![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/8b97b5aad24c30e4a1357b38cc39aeaa.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Sun, 11 May 2008 09:01:01 +0200 Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
you ask why this is so hard? Simple answer: because no-one has contributed a way so far to make it easier.
Gee, I had no trouble at all doing this last week (the release of Oracle library bits for Intel OS-X means it's now desirable). I installed macports, did a self-update, then installed py25-lxml. It installed python2.5.2 and the versions of libxml2 and libxslt that were in macports as part of the process. Installing cx_Oracle after that was more work.
We had lots of reports about stuff not working and almost as many work-arounds, but no-one came up with a patch that would allow building lxml reliably at least on a subset of Mac-OS systems. And I just cannot believe that there is no-one amongst the Mac-OS-X users who knows how to use distutils to build a binary extension. Or at least someone who knows how to build C code statically against a C library.
I'm sorry, but my experience is that binary distributions make the problems *worse*, not better
I wasn't talking about distributing binaries. I meant: someone has to provide a way to configure the compiler so that it builds lxml statically on Mac-OS. Stefan