David root at
Tue Sep 26 04:04:44 CEST 2000

On 25 Sep 2000 23:16:12 +0200, Martin von Loewis
<loewis at> wrote:
>root at (David) writes:
>> Is there any reason the XML sig has chosen to make it so f****g difficult
>> to install the XML package?
>What did you try to do, and what exactly was difficult?

I tried to use Python v2.0b XML, using the XML How-To.  Of course, that was
futile: turns out that the two aren't talking about the same XML package.
I tried to install the XML-SIG's XML package on my Windows machine.  I'm
expected to go spend a ton of money on Visual C++ to compile some module or
other.  And if I don't want to (--skip-build)... well, the install script
doesn't actually work anyway.

I go consult the archives and find several postings that are exactly
appropriate to my problem.  No answers to them, though.  By that point, I
wasn't particularly surprised.

It's been quite frustrating.  I've tried poking at the XML stuff several
times since spring.  Everything was actually pretty OK for 1.5.2, but I was
foolish enough to think that v2's claims of XML support indicated some sort
of significant advance.
Instead, it seems to be less functional and less documented.  :-(

It's not that I'm unappreciative of XML-SIG.  It's that the efforts seem
less than complete or honest.  On the front page of the XML-SIG page, you
should have writ large: "Windows Users Bugger Off!"  Reality is, us WinOS
bumpkins ain't got the C compilers or H4X0R smarts to deal with the
A precompiled binary and working install script would make these problems
just vanish.

More information about the Python-list mailing list