Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #42613

Re: distutils without a compiler

Show all headers | View raw

In article <515AA9BF.4010602@chamonix.reportlab.co.uk>,
 Robin Becker <robin@reportlab.com> wrote:
> Is there a neat way to get distutils to report compiler absence? Most windows 
> users don't have a compiler so building extensions usually doesn't work.
> 
> However, python's builtin batteries would allow pre-built pyds to be 
> downloaded 
> in lieu of an actual build.
> 
> Has anyone created a fallback download compiler or similar?

I'm not totally sure I understand what you are asking but here's a 
guess.  Today, probably the most widely-used solution to provide 
packages with pre-built C extension modules is to use setuptools or its 
Distribute fork and build a bdist egg which can then be downloaded and 
installed with the easy_install command.

Note the whole area of binary distributions for Python is one that is 
now under intense active development.  The standard library replacement 
for binary eggs will be wheels;  various tools to support building and 
installing them are being designed and implemented and are expected to 
be part of Python 3.4 with downloadable support for selected earlier 
releases.  It's all happening on the distutils-sig and in various PEPs.  
Nick Coughlan, the core developer leading the design effort, gives an 
overview of the current plans here:

http://python-notes.boredomandlaziness.org/en/latest/pep_ideas/core_packa
ging_api.html

-- 
 Ned Deily,
 nad@acm.org

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: distutils without a compiler Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-04-02 16:26 -0700
  Re: Fwd: Re: distutils without a compiler "Colin J. Williams" <cjw@ncf.ca> - 2013-04-05 08:38 -0400

csiph-web