Mark Hammond added the comment: Vinay's idea makes sense to me. Paul can also subtly change the patch such that when SCRIPT_WRAPPER is defined, failure to find the wrapper is fatal and prints a message specific to this fact rather than just starting an interactive Python (assuming I read the patch correctly, that is :) Then a new .exe is built named something innocuous, installed in a single well-known location as the "stub" and that pip-style code creating the wrapper has a nice easy job :)
---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue18491> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
