> From: Matthias Klose > To: Konovalov, Vadim; Segher Boessenkool; > On 20.07.2018 20:53, Konovalov, Vadim wrote: > > Sometimes those are not behind, those could have no python for other > > reasons - > > maybe those are too forward? They just don't have python yet? > > > >>> it is straightforward. > >> > >> Installing it is not straightforward at all. > > > > I also agree with this; > > all == "Installing it is not straightforward" ? > > I do question this. I mentioned elsewhere what is needed.
What is needed - not always presented. > > Please consider that both Python - 2 and 3 - they both do not > > support build chain on Windows with GCC > > > > for me, it is a showstopper > > This seems to be a different issue. However I have to say > that I'm not booting > Windows on a regular basis. Does build chain on Windows > means Cygwin? If yes, > there surely is Python available prebuilt. Cygwin is very different platform, python rebuild on Cygwin is supported here, yes, but this is very different matter. But I was talking about Windows, not Cygwin, Rebuild of Python on windows (without Cygwin) not supported, I was surprised to discover that and I will be gladly accept and use it When it eventually will support GCC+Windows rebuild. There are some blogs on Internet about someone who eventually did a build on windows with GCC, but - why this effort wasn't propagated into python mainstream? Most of those mentioned blogs are from 2006 or 2008; rather obsolete and could not be easily reused https://wiki.python.org/moin/WindowsCompilers mentions GCC - MinGW (x86) MinGW is an alternative C/C++ compiler that works with all Python versions up to 3.4. BUT this is just fake - no, the instruction is unfinished and does not work even supposed to work > Matthias
