Re: Optional BSD package is required for (useable) Python?

On May 11, 2004, at 4:00 PM, Chris Barker wrote:

> Bob, thanks, you're a wealth of knowledge, as usual.
>
> Bob Ippolito wrote:
> > For an application actually embedding Python, you don't ever use the 
> > executable, just the framework.  Bundlebuilder2, as-is, does not 
> > embed Python, because it does not have an executable stub (just 
> > scripts).
>
> But it doesn't require /usr/bin/python either, does it?

Actually it does, you need *some* /usr/bin/python to exist in order to 
run the bootstrap script that exeve's the proper python.

> > PyMacApp and the PyObjC Xcode template (they are indistinguishable) 
> > does.
> > > B) your installer could install a /usr/bin/python2.3 symlink.
> > That's probably a bad idea.
> > There are two problems you can have.  You can't link to the framework 
> > properly (boom! link error), or the Python code doesn't work.
>
> Macs are just weird.

It's not the Mac's fault that the user screwed up their configuration.  
You could just as easily bork a linux configuration by installing your 
own python over a system python, replacing symlinks, etc.

> By the way, what's the status of BundleBuilder2? Should I be using it?

It more or less does everything the original bundlebuilder does, but 
more correctly, so I would say yes.  Personally I've been using my 
Xcode template recently and just managing dependencies manually.  I 
haven't had the time or desire to futz around with bundlebuilder2 
lately.  I might just decide to shred it into orthogonal pieces and 
build something else with a different interface next time I work on it, 
because the more I use bundlebuilder the less I like how it works.

-bob


_______________________________________________
Pythonmac-SIG maillist  -  Pythonmac-SIG@xxxxxxxxxx
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig