distutils, C extensions, Borland compiler, wxPython

Anders J. Munch andersjm at dancontrol.dk
Wed Feb 6 13:57:50 CET 2002


"Gerhard Häring" <gh_pythonlist at gmx.de> wrote in message
news:mailman.1012939329.5851.python-list at python.org...
> Le 05/02/02 à 15:07, Anders J. Munch écrivit:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have built Python from source on Win2K using cygwin except with a
> > Borland compiler (BCB4) instead of gcc.  It took a fair amount of
> > hacks to get the configure script and makefiles to work (s/.o/.obj/ is
> > just the beginning) but it was worth it.
>
> I' currently doing something similar with mingw32 instead of Cygwin :-)
>
> The real question is if you can use dynamically loaded extension modules
> at all if you have all of the Python core in a python.exe.

And I thought the Python core was always in python.exe.  Strange .. in
my build the python core is in the .exe, and I haven't done anything
special to achieve that, just "make install".  Perhaps a difference
between the makefile in the root of the source tree and the PC
subdirectory stuff?

>
> I think I have heard something to the effect, that on Windows, DLLs
> can't link back to .EXEs, only to other DLLs.
>
> Which would mean that you can either build a python{major}{minor}.dll or
> you compile every single extension module (i. e. all of wxPython, for
> example) into one big python.exe.

Yup!  One build, one binary, one compiler, one consistent set of
compiler switches for everything => no hassle.  That's my philosophy.
Well ok _some_ hassle, but no nasty surprises when the alignment gets
mixed up or the runtimes in the .dll and the .exe don't cooperate.

- Anders





More information about the Python-list mailing list