[Pythonmac-SIG] Extensions for static versus frame

[Chris Barker]

Jack et al.

I've been trying to follow this conversation as best I can. I am still
pretty confused about the mingled world of OS-X (is it a Mac? is it
Unix? it's both!). I do think that it would be best to settle on a
single version of Python for OS-X that is generally distributed as a
binary, but also easy to re-build.

I recently tried out the Mach-O Framework build that Robin Dunn put on
the wxPython sourceforge site, and it seems to work just great. With
limited testing, it seems to act like it should from the Finder, and act
like Unix Python at the command line. Is there anything Unix-y that you
can't do with it? If not, it seems like it should be the standard build.

I understand that there are issues with whether you can use the same
extensions with a Framework and non-Framework build. It seems to me that
if you don't lose anything Unix-y by using a Framework build, then that
could just be the standard, and it doesn't matter if extensions work the
other way. If you really want to use a non-Framework build, you can
always re-compile your own extensions, and a non-standard build should
only be used by folks that can handle doing that anyway.

For all this to work, I suppose distutils should work "as expected" with
either type of build. Does it?

-Chris



-- 
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer
                                    		
NOAA/OR&R/HAZMAT         (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception

Chris.Barker@noaa.gov