[Python-Dev] Install-on-first-use vs. optional extensions

Thomas Heller theller at python.net
Wed Sep 8 20:34:57 CEST 2004

"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> writes:

> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> I frequently use the extension feature in a console context; when I am
>> in a directory full of .py files, I can run any one of them by simply
>> typing its name (and possibly command line arguments). The script will
>> then interact through the existing console window. WIll this work?
> No. I didn't (really) know that was possible (although Mr Rivest's
> bug report should have taught me).
> I've tried to fix it, and now think this is impossible: Even though
> XP provides an AttachConsole call (which doesn't exist in earlier
> releases or W9x), which allows to write in the console from which
> the binary was started, there is apparently no way to tell cmd.exe
> that it should wait for completion, instead of immediately giving
> a prompt.
> I have now reverted the change to create launcher.exe, and install
> python.exe and pythonw.exe twice (the second time as extpy.exe and
> extpyw.exe).
> P.S. Out of curiosity, and to the WINDOWS GURUS ON THIS LIST:
> How does cmd.exe know whether the program started is a console
> application or not? Is there any API for that? Just looking at
> the file being run is clearly insufficient - if the file is
> foo.py, it needs to look at python.exe.

It seems to be a flag in the exe header.  A quick google search turned
up this:



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list