Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Packaging and binary distributions for Python 3.3

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Sat Oct 15 10:57:08 CEST 2011 
On 15 October 2011 09:04, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I wish I felt more comfortable with MSI as a format (as opposed to an
>> opaque clickable installer). I'd be interested to know what others
>> think.
>
> Compilation can be a problem on Linux systems as well, so a platform
> neutral format is a better idea. Just have a mechanism that allows
> pysetup to create a bdist_msi from a bdist_simple. Similar, bdist_rpm
> and bdist_deb plugins could be taught to interpret bdist_simple.
>
> However, you do get into architecture problems (x86 vs x86_64 vs ARM)
> if you go that route.

Architecture problems are an issue for any binary format, surely? It's
the content (the binaries themselves) that are architecture dependent,
not the format itself.

Paul.
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list