Re: Using python + pygtk in Desktop modules (was Re: Revisiting the Gnome Bindings)
- From: Mike Hearn <mike navi cx>
- To: desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Using python + pygtk in Desktop modules (was Re: Revisiting the Gnome Bindings)
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:33:27 +0100
> Not "my" site :) I am unrelated to this project.
Oops, sorry! I got the wrong idea.
> This binary compatibility note refers to the binary distribution of
> cx_Freeze itself, not programs produced by cx_Freeze.
Ah, OK. Why is cx_Freeze not distributed via itself, I wonder?
> OK. The problem cx_Freeze solves is the following. Imagine I want to
> make a 3rd party application in python. I don't want do depend on a
> particular version of python or pygtk or whatever. So, I install
> cx_Freeze, and I create a binary distribution of my application. This
> binary distribution consists of a directory containing and exe file with
> statically linked python interpreter + program code, and a few shared
> libraries containing copies of all python C modules the program depends
> on.
Yes, I have seen similar things before. PAR does that for Perl on Windows.
It's inefficient but works.
> I hear pygtk win32 developers use this trick all the time with great
> success (see for example http://wingware.com/), although they usually
> use py2exe instead of cx_Freeze (py2exe is win32 only).
>
> I'm not suggesting we create binary packages this way. This approach
> produces large binary packages with much code duplication. Normally
> it's better to just distribute the source and require a certain version
> of python and pygtk. But for 3rd party vendors, this could be a good
> alternative.
Indeed, thanks for pointing it out.
thanks -mike
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]