Python compiled?

Jorgen Grahn jgrahn-nntq at
Thu Sep 8 22:41:06 CEST 2005

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:40:28 -0500, Terry Hancock <hancock at> wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 September 2005 11:32 am, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> I hope people are less hesitant to install "interpreted" applications today
>> than they were ten years ago.
>> I also believe it's better to convince the end user to install Python before
>> installing the application[1], rather than to try to sneak in an interpreter
>> with py2exe or something -- an interpreter which the end user cannot update,
>> manage or use for other things.
> I have to confess to be very ignorant about the Windows installation options
> for Python packages, but surely in principle at least, it should be possible
> to make self-installing .EXE files that do what I get from
> apt-get install python-mypackage
> or at least
> dpkg --install mypackage
> That is to say, which install an interpreter if one isn't already there, and
> then install the package. Or, upon finding an interpreter install into it
> along the lines of distutils.

It has been a while since I used bdist_wininst, but I hope it at least

a) detects if there is a suitable Python installed
b) otherwise, suggests that the user should install one,
   explains why, gives the URL of a suitable package,
   and the size of the download

Things get trickier, of course, if the software depends on external packages
and modules.


  // Jorgen Grahn <jgrahn@       Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu
\X/      >   R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

More information about the Python-list mailing list