Stefan Behnel wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Perhaps we could use the following test inside 'setup.py', and modify the name of the binary egg to include the 'ucs2' vs. 'ucs4' flag?::
ucs_flag = sys.maxunicode > 65536 and 'ucs4' or 'ucs2'
While that's nice to have, it doesn't really help us as a) we'd still have to build and ship both eggs (while the current UCS4 eggs seem to fit most users)
There'd be a significant amount of people who just build Python by hand though, and they can't use our eggs...
I still think it's enough to add a FAQ entry (which I already did) and otherwise ignore the problem for now. That way, the major distros are supported out-of-the-box. And for those who happen to use a UCS2 system, it's really not a big deal to build lxml from sources on a fairly recent and well installed Linux system.
I agree that's all we can do on the lxml side.
Apart from that, we can also talk to the distutils/setuptools people and raise this issue again. It's a fundamental problem with binary eggs that use unicode as long as Python ships with this configuration option. I'll send off a mail on this to the distutils SIG.