David Cournapeau wrote:
> Well, yes, it could be a totally different, incompatible python that it
> would still do as you said - distutils cannot be trusted at all to do
> the right thing here,
quite true -- though hopefully you now what is on your system, so it can
only go so wrong.
However I j
Christopher Barker wrote:
>
> I'm not surprised it took that long -- that sounds short to me!
>
> Anyway, If there are new python builds that are 64-bit (quad?) you wont'
> have to change much -- "only" make sure that the libs you are linking to
> are 64 bit. I suppose you could try to get a quad
Christopher Barker wrote:
> Anyway, If there are new python builds that are 64-bit (quad?) you wont'
> have to change much -- "only" make sure that the libs you are linking to
> are 64 bit. I suppose you could try to get a quad-universal gfortran.a
> now,
Actually, it looks like the binary at:
David Cournapeau wrote:
> Christopher Barker wrote:
>> It does, but we don't need a binary installer for a python that doesn't
>> have a binary installer.
>
> Yes, not now - but I would prefer avoiding to have to change the process
> again when time comes. It may not look like it, but enabling a
Christopher Barker wrote:
> It does, but we don't need a binary installer for a python that doesn't
> have a binary installer.
>
Yes, not now - but I would prefer avoiding to have to change the process
again when time comes. It may not look like it, but enabling a working
process which works w
David Cournapeau wrote:
> Chris Barker wrote:
>> Well, neither Apple nor python.org's builds are 64 bit anyway at this
>> point. There is talk of quad (i386,and ppc_64 i86_64) builds the the
>> future, though.
>>
> Yes, but that's something that has to should be supported sooner rather
> than
Chris Barker wrote:
>
> I see -- well that's good news. I've found the Universal library
> requirements to be a pain sometimes, and it probably would be here if
> Apple wasn't giving us lapack/blas.
>
Yes, definitely. I could see a lot of trouble if people had to build a
universal ATLAS :)
>
David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> I assume you meant NOT the easiest? ;-)
>
> Actually, no, I meant it :) It has gcc, which is the best supported
> compiler by numpy and scipy, there is almost no problem with g77, and
> the optimized blas/lapack is
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
> David Cournapeau wrote:
>> I don't really care, as long as there is only one. Maintaining binaries
>> for every python out there is too time consuming. Given that mac os X
>> is the easiest platform to build numpy/scipy on,
>
> I assume you me
David Cournapeau wrote:
> I don't really care, as long as there is only one. Maintaining binaries
> for every python out there is too time consuming. Given that mac os X
> is the easiest platform to build numpy/scipy on,
I assume you meant NOT the easiest? ;-)
> that's not something i am interest
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
> Well, this is the big question: what python(s) should be provide
> binaries for -- I think if you're only going to do one, it should be the
> python.org build, so that you can support 10.4, and 10.5 and everyone
> can use it.
I don't really
David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Robert Pyle wrote:
>> This one installs, but only in /Library/Python/2.5/site-packages/,
>> that is, for Apple's system python. This happened when `which python`
>> pointed to either EPD python or python.org's 2.5.4.
>
> Yes, what your
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Robert Pyle wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I decided to change the Subject line to be more apropos.
>
> On Mar 30, 2009, at 3:41 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>
>> David Cournapeau wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Robert Pyle
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
I just insta
Hi David,
I decided to change the Subject line to be more apropos.
On Mar 30, 2009, at 3:41 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> David Cournapeau wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Robert Pyle
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I just installed 2.5.4 from python.org, and the OS X installer still
>>> doesn'
14 matches
Mail list logo
