Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> added the comment: > I don’t understand the notions of standard vs. custom. > Does standard mean setuptools? #12394 is not quite ready yet, so > nothing is set in stone, but if possible I’d prefer to generate > pysetup.exe. Let’s move the sub-discussion there.
Okay, we'll continue on #12394, but I'll comment here on "standard vs. custom" - by "standard", I meant the setuptools way of doing it, but not necessarily using the setuptools code - see my comment in #12394 on an alternative. The basic method is that used by setuptools, but the specific implementation is different - somescript.exe opens somescript-script.py, reads a shebang line to find which Python to invoke, then invokes it with the script. By "custom" I meant "something else" without anything specific in mind - and I'm not sure it's worth the bother and extra work of a customised pysetup.exe. Perhaps all or at least some of this could be simplified in 3.3 if the PEP 397 launcher is included in Python. Mark Hammond has re-started discussions about this on Python-dev, and hopefully we'll have a consensus to get it in. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14027> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
