On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 5:44:51 AM UTC+5:30, Erik wrote: > On 01/02/17 23:20, Wildman via Python-list wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:29:00 +0000, Chris Green wrote: > > > >> Wildman wrote: > >>> On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 19:15:13 +0000, Chris Green wrote: > >> OK, no problem, but isn't it very non-portable? > > > > I don't see why not. It should work on any system > > that has Python3 installed, at least that is my > > understanding. I'm sure someone will correct me > > if I'm wrong. > > > > OTOH if you want in insure 100% portability with any > > script, you can use pyinstaller. > > > > To install for Python2: > > pip install pyinstaller > > > > For Python3: > > > > pip3 install pyinstaller > > Out of interest (as someone who grew up on the great 1.5.7 ;)) - is > there a definitive resource that explains all of the various packaging > and installation options that exist for Python modules these days (both > for an author and a user)? > > A lot of Linux distributions have Python-related packages (other than > the language itself) which can be installed using the system installer. > > Then there's "pip", which is an installer which is installed using the > system installer. > > Now, apparently, there's "pyinstaller" which can be installed using the > "pip" installer! > > I'd like to understand the differences and how this all fits together.
+10 From me for this question My impression is that this question is signally badly addressed because it falls between OS-language stools: ie in the larger Linux-Python ecosystem some things are naturally addressed as Linux docs, some as python docs. This (and such issues) seems to be a buck that loves to be passed around -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
