Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
+00: googled for the mingw home page
+00: found the mingw download page
+02: finally figured out what to download
+03: noticed that my usual SF site only offered 1K/s; aborted download
+07: finished downloading the mingw kit from another SF site
+17: f
Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've never understood the problem with long URLs. Many
> newsreaders let you click on them. If not, you just cut/paste
> it into a browser (with a shellscript a couple lines long, you
> can start firefox with the URL on the X clipboard with a single
>
> I've never understood the problem with long URLs. Many
> newsreaders let you click on them. If not, you just cut/paste
> it into a browser (with a shellscript a couple lines long, you
> can start firefox with the URL on the X clipboard with a single
> command).
Some break the urls - so copy an
On 2005-02-20, Nick Vargish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "BrainDead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email
>> address, this may well be relevant.
> [ 4-line URL snipped ]
>
> Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit t
Nick Vargish schreef:
> Please consider a visit to
> tinyurl.com before posting a monster like that... :^)
As long as he also posts the full URL...
--
JanC
"Be strict when sending and tolerant when receiving."
RFC 1958 - Architectural Principles of the Internet - section 3.9
--
http://mail.py
Nick Vargish wrote:
> "BrainDead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email
> > address, this may well be relevant.
> [ 4-line URL snipped ]
>
> Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit to
> tinyurl.com before posting a
"BrainDead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email
> address, this may well be relevant.
[ 4-line URL snipped ]
Thanks for the historical reference. Please consider a visit to
tinyurl.com before posting a monster like that... :^)
Nick
--
[Snip]
Martin,
I believe that you are wasting your time. Looking at your email
address, this may well be relevant.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/de.admin.net-abuse.news/browse_frm/thread/8914399857641c05/4163a4fb8a624349?q=Ilias&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fde.admin.net-abuse.news%2Fsearch%3Fgroup%3D
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Pat wrote:
> > On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary
> > packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to
> > compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty
gritty
> > details about which you'd rather remain ignorant
[snip, Ilias would not understand it]
> P.S. if Ilias volunteers, or offers to pay someone to do this,
instead of just
> complaining, will hell freeze over?)
Nick,
There is about as much chance of hell freezing over as there is of
England beating Australia in the cricket this summer. [I'am a
hal
> If you put yourself into the shoes of someone who decides to use a
> Python product that requires compiling, and that product contains C
> extensions that also need compiling, you'll see that it doesn't matter
> whether or not that individual has actually written a single line of
> Python themsel
Pat wrote:
On Windows, most users are used to installing precompiled binary
packages, rather than compiling from source. When you do have to
compile from source, it often requires you to fiddle with nitty gritty
details about which you'd rather remain ignorant. The less fiddling
required, the hap
A.B., Khalid wrote:
[...] - (comments)
I've just overflown your comments for a few seconds.
And I got my confirmations.
Thank you for your time.
--
pyMinGW:
http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html
.
--
http://lazaridis.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
>
> >> Just out of curiousity: How many python extensions are you
planning to
> >> write?
> >
> > I estimate 10 to 100, depending on abstractional capabilities of
the
> > extension system.
> >
> >> And how many lines of pure python code have you written in your
life?
> >
> >
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> A.B., Khalid wrote:
> > Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> >
> >>The first step is to make a pyMinGW project.
> >
> > You are mistaken. The first steps are the following:
> [...] - (nonrelevant comments)
>
> > 3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That
it
> >
A.B., Khalid wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
The first step is to make a pyMinGW project.
You are mistaken. The first steps are the following:
[...] - (nonrelevant comments)
3) Realizing that there _is_ already a project called pyMinGW! That it
does not fit your requirements-- whatever these maybe--
Ilias Lazaridis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Duncan Booth wrote:
[...]
> > It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL
> > spreading to other open source software with which it is linked.
> > "In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits
> > programs whose sour
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> The first step is to make a pyMinGW project.
>
You are mistaken. The first steps are the following:
1) Realizing that a project _must_ start not because you want it to,
but because those who are willing to work on it think it is worth the
extra effort for it to.
2) Reali
Josef Meile wrote:
It looks like here the only worth words are yours. Didn't
you close this thread?
yes, but when reviewing again I found this lack [created by myself due
to private conversation].
I will refresh your mind with your own unpolite way:
I find this very polite [to notify conversation
It looks like here the only worth words are yours. Didn't
you close this thread?
I will refresh your mind with your own unpolite way:
"""
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
[...]
closing thread
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/f2ae9cdbe16676d1
"""
Anyway, I will add some comments:
The d
[this is a summary of a private conversation that I had with the
developer of the phMinGW. It contains just my comments. I've send
additionally a CC via email (private-to-public switch notification)]
-
A.B., Khalid wrote:
[...]
Khalid,
first of all I like to thank you for the efforts you have ta
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> "Pat" wrote:
>
> > A few things. Primarily the fact that I'm not very experienced in
C
> > (the extensions that I need to have compiled are not written by
me).
> > Secondarily, the fact that the discussion threads I read made it
seem
> > much more complicated than what you j
Robert Kern wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Duncan Booth wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
There is a OS-tool-chain supported on windows, cygwin.
this depends on cygwin.dll, which is GPL licensed
[or am I wrong?]
It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL
spreading
[...]
If I understand
Duncan Booth wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
"In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits
programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies
with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without
libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>> "In accordance with section 10 of the GPL, Red Hat, Inc. permits
>> programs whose sources are distributed under a license that complies
>> with the Open Source definition to be linked with libcygwin.a without
>> libcygwin.a itself causing the resulting program to be cove
Pat wrote:
Actually, no. We ran into some issues with Python 2.4 that caused us
to return to Python 2.3.5. But I would really like to upgrade to
Python 2.4. So I started researching the subject before I did
anything.
If you are telling me that minGW can compile extensions that are
compatible wit
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
Duncan Booth wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
There is a OS-tool-chain supported on windows, cygwin.
this depends on cygwin.dll, which is GPL licensed
[or am I wrong?]
It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL spreading
to other open source software with wh
Duncan Booth wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
There is a OS-tool-chain supported on windows, cygwin.
this depends on cygwin.dll, which is GPL licensed
[or am I wrong?]
It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL spreading to
other open source software with which it is linked.
"In ac
Stephen Kellett wrote:
> Lots of points from Tony stating a different point of view. I'll assume you
> are correct. However,
> surely if you Python 2.4 installed they'll have this DLL anyway, so the point
> is moot, unless of
> course, Python 2.4 is in breach as well.
the compilers used to bu
"Pat" wrote:
> A few things. Primarily the fact that I'm not very experienced in C
> (the extensions that I need to have compiled are not written by me).
> Secondarily, the fact that the discussion threads I read made it seem
> much more complicated than what you just described.
from two posts a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony
Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
There are also other conditions, to do with what you are redistributing it
with (it can't be alone), and including a particular type of license with
your redistribution. (It appears that Python 2.4 doesn't correctly follow
this
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> "Pat" wrote:
>
> > Okay, I think we are pretty much talking about the same thing. My
> > problem is not that I'm unable or unwilling to purchase a good
> > compiler. My problem is that I don't want to make it a requirement
of
> > my users. The twist is that my users will
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
What configuration hassle? Can't be any harder than specifying a
different CRT surely?
I don't want to have to ask users of my code to have to go through
this:
http://www.vrplumber.com/programming/mstoolkit/
OK. I misunderstood your or
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen Kellett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
if I have both versions of Python installed - 2.3.5 and 2.4? Is there
an easy way to detect this and switch between the two dlls?
Easy? Depends what you call
>> In addition, there are some unresolved licensing questions
>> concerning the .NET runtime file for extensions (msvcr71.dll):
[...]
> msvcr71.dll is a redistributable for applications written using their
> compiler. You can redistribute that.
If (and only if) you own a copy of the (non-free) M
Stephen Kellett wrote:
>>if I have both versions of Python installed - 2.3.5 and 2.4? Is there
>>an easy way to detect this and switch between the two dlls?
>
> Easy? Depends what you call easy.
in the context of "building a C extension when you have multiple versions
installed", the answer is "
"Pat" wrote:
> Having to tell users that they need to download, install, and configure
> all this additional compiler stuff is asking too much from my potential
> user base, since I'm also targeting novices and developers from other
> languages for whom C compiler stuff is going to be a barrier to
"Pat" wrote:
> If you are telling me that minGW can compile extensions that are
> compatible with the Python 2.4 that uses msvcr71.dll, then that is good
> news indeed. Is there anything that needs to be configured or patched
> to make this happen? And how does minGW know which dll to link? Wha
"Pat" wrote:
> Okay, I think we are pretty much talking about the same thing. My
> problem is not that I'm unable or unwilling to purchase a good
> compiler. My problem is that I don't want to make it a requirement of
> my users. The twist is that my users will be working out of a
> Subversion
Pat wrote:
> There have been extensive discussions about these issues on the
> Python-Dev mailing list over the past couple of months (mostly in
> December, but continuing to the present - see
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-December/thread.html
> as a starting point), which seem
Stephen Kellett wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pat
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >That answers the cost question (assuming that your interpretation of
> >the licensing is correct, since I'm not a lawyer nor qualified to
> >render much of an opinion on that). But there is still the issue
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
if I have both versions of Python installed - 2.3.5 and 2.4? Is there
an easy way to detect this and switch between the two dlls?
Easy? Depends what you call easy.
a) You just need to detect if pythonNN.dll is implicitly linked to
ms
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> "Pat"wrote:
>
> > I thought I was being as clear and specific as I needed to be.
> > Apparently not. I'm talking about compiling the original source
code
>
> the python source or the extension source?
>
> > The bottom line is that compiling C extension modules
>
> would
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
That answers the cost question (assuming that your interpretation of
the licensing is correct, since I'm not a lawyer nor qualified to
render much of an opinion on that). But there is still the issue of
going through a bunch of config
Stephen Kellet said:
Pat, could you include some context in your replies? I have no idea if
you are replying to my comments about Visual Studio Express or someone
else? The only text I see in your replies is what you write, no text
from the posting you are replying to. As it is I've ignored all y
>>users. I can't expect them to purchase a .NET compiler or go through
a
>See above.
That answers the cost question (assuming that your interpretation of
the licensing is correct, since I'm not a lawyer nor qualified to
render much of an opinion on that). But there is still the issue of
going t
"Pat"wrote:
> I thought I was being as clear and specific as I needed to be.
> Apparently not. I'm talking about compiling the original source code
the python source or the extension source?
> The bottom line is that compiling C extension modules
would indicate the latter. setup.py handle
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Actually, no. We ran into some issues with Python 2.4 that caused us
to return to Python 2.3.5. But I would really like to upgrade to
Python 2.4. So I started researching the subject before I did
anything.
Pat, could you include som
Actually, no. We ran into some issues with Python 2.4 that caused us
to return to Python 2.3.5. But I would really like to upgrade to
Python 2.4. So I started researching the subject before I did
anything.
If you are telling me that minGW can compile extensions that are
compatible with the Pyth
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen Kellett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Studio Express (downloadable from the Microsoft's website). This DLL is
(to my understanding) part of Visual Studio 7.1 and Visual Studio
Express.
My mistake. Visual Studio Express is going to be part of Version 8
(2005)
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Wow! I must say, I'm less than impressed with the responses so far. I
know Ilias can give the impression that he is just trolling, but I can
assure you he is not. At least, not in this case. ;-)
He deserves what he gets. He appears
Pat wrote:
Wow! I must say, I'm less than impressed with the responses so far. I
know Ilias can give the impression that he is just trolling, but I can
assure you he is not. At least, not in this case. ;-)
So in an effort to make some headway, I'm going to try to summarize the
current state of
I thought I was being as clear and specific as I needed to be.
Apparently not. I'm talking about compiling the original source code,
per the recommendations made by Mike Fletcher and documented here:
Python 2.4 Extensions w/ the MS Toolkit Compiler
http://www.vrplumber.com/programming/mstoolkit/
"Pat" wrote:
> The bottom line is that compiling C extension modules on the
> Windows platform for Python 2.4 is, today, a royal pain in the
> ass.
really?
> python setup.py install
works for me.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Wow! I must say, I'm less than impressed with the responses so far. I
know Ilias can give the impression that he is just trolling, but I can
assure you he is not. At least, not in this case. ;-)
So in an effort to make some headway, I'm going to try to summarize the
current state of affairs.
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>> There is a OS-tool-chain supported on windows, cygwin.
>
> this depends on cygwin.dll, which is GPL licensed
>
> [or am I wrong?]
It is GPL licensed with an amendment which prevents the GPL spreading to
other open source software with which it is linked.
"In accorda
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
Where does that requirement come from? If you want to create large
scale apps, the price for a msvc++ compiler shouldn't matter. And:
Windows is a non-free platform at first. If you have to or want to
develop on top of it, be prepared to pay. Its as simple as that. If
you wa
Michael Hoffman wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
[REQUOTE]
Oh, I can play that game too:
[REQUOTE]
Identify what needs to be done and create a patch, and it will be
accepted if it is a good patch.
"
c) Why are the following efforts not _directly_ included in the python
source code base?
http://jove.
>> Where does that requirement come from? If you want to create large
>> scale apps, the price for a msvc++ compiler shouldn't matter. And:
>> Windows is a non-free platform at first. If you have to or want to
>> develop on top of it, be prepared to pay. Its as simple as that. If
>> you want someth
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
[REQUOTE]
Oh, I can play that game too:
>> [REQUOTE]
>> Identify what needs to be done and create a patch, and it will be
>> accepted if it is a good patch.
MinGW patches have been accepted before. Start submitting yours. As
you point out, there is stuff on the web that means
Michael Hoffman wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
"The Python Foundation could create an official sub-project to create
an automated build target based on the MinGW toolchain. I am sure that
many community members would be more than happy to contribute."
An "official sub-project" for something like t
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
I want to develope large scale applications, and for this I need an
stable official version of the python language, either binary or
produced directly out of official sources, completely with an
open-source tool-chain.
Where does that requirement co
Fuzzyman wrote:
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
[snip..]
b) Why does the Python Foundation not ensure, that the python
source-code is directly compilable with MinGW?
Why should they? It already runs on Windows with a freely available
compiler.
Obvious: Courtesy [against the userbase needs]
Obvious: Consiste
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> [please check your news-client. For some reason, the tag "[EVALUATION]"
> was removed]
>
> I want to develope large scale applications, and for this I need an
> stable official version of the python language, either binary or
> produced directly out of official sources, c
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
"The Python Foundation could create an official sub-project to create an
automated build target based on the MinGW toolchain. I am sure that many
community members would be more than happy to contribute."
An "official sub-project" for something like this is not necessary. I
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
[snip..]
> >> b) Why does the Python Foundation not ensure, that the python
> >> source-code is directly compilable with MinGW?
> >
> > Why should they? It already runs on Windows with a freely available
> > compiler.
>
> Obvious: Courtesy [against the userbase needs]
>
> O
[please check your news-client. For some reason, the tag "[EVALUATION]"
was removed]
-
You answer essentially something like "It's not necessary" cause "with a
little hacking it works".
I've found lots of documents, which describe how to "hack around" to
make it work.
I don't want to do "hack
Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> I'm a newcomer to python:
>
> [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Python Helps?
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/75f0c5c35374f553
>
> -
>
> I've download (as suggested) the python 2.4 installer for windows.
>
> Now I have problems to compil
68 matches
Mail list logo
