python to exe

[Mark Lawrence]

Or possibly "That's hilarious!!!". Gallows humour is sometimes hard to
predict.

Thinking about it can be that's not funny or hilarious depending on
context, which is rather difficult to give on this internet/webby thingy.

 

[Jonathan Hartley]

Robin,


I can assure you that Py2exe does work on Windows 7 (my firm develops
commercial Python applications packaged using Py2exe running on Windows
7), but it does take a bit of fiddling and some patience. Join the
py2exe newsgroup and post your problems there.https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/py2exe-users

You may also want to google 'Gui2exe'. This is a free front-end to
Py2exe that you can use to generate your Py2exe setup.py scripts. Note
that Gui2exe requires wxPython (free) to run.

Finally, make sure you are trying to compile 32-bit Python 2.x code. I
don't think py2exe supports Python 3.x or 64-bit versions of Python yet.


I hear great things about PyInstaller. The project is not dead - make
sure you use the latest version in the SVN.

Search stackoverflow.com for positive feedback and tips on PyInstaller.
Its on our plate to take a good look this product 'one of these days'.

Good luck!

Malcolm

I summarised a all the alternatives to py2exe I could find, here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tZ42hjaRunvkObFq0bKxVdg&output=html

Looking for those with a green 'y' in the 'Windows' row, you want to
check out cx_freeze, PyInstaller, bbfreeze.

Best of luck.

 

[python]

Jonathan,

I summarised a all the alternatives to py2exe I could find, here:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tZ42hjaRunvkObFq0bKxVdg&output=html

Really great work - thanks for sharing this with all of us!!!

Regards,
Malcolm

 

[John Bokma]

of Google. If they haven't used it, I don't really consider the gentle
reminder that LMGTFY gives too harsh. If you do, you're too much of a gentle
soul to be on the internet at all; someone might say "Boo" to you at any
moment. Beware.

I've no problem with lmgtfy. I *do* have a problem with hiding it behing
a tinyurl. Why use 2 levels of obfuscating in a group that's about
programming in a language that promotes clear coding?

The message would have been the same if the OP had just copy pasted the
Google link. But hey, that's way less "funny".

 

[David Monaghan]

Sorry. That last comment of mine was uncalled for.

I've no problem with lmgtfy. I *do* have a problem with hiding it behing
a tinyurl. Why use 2 levels of obfuscating in a group that's about
programming in a language that promotes clear coding?

The message would have been the same if the OP had just copy pasted the
Google link. But hey, that's way less "funny".

Good point, although one could argue the unhidden response is just rude, but
the masking does make it genuinely funny.

DaveM

 

[John Bokma]

Sorry. That last comment of mine was uncalled for.
Thanks.


Good point, although one could argue the unhidden response is just rude, but
the masking does make it genuinely funny.

One could argue, sure. But to me it's just the same as posting GFY
(don't want to upset the tender soulds again with "the F-word".

 

[CM]

Sorry. That last comment of mine was uncalled for.



Good point, although one could argue the unhidden response is just rude, but
the masking does make it genuinely funny.

DaveM

I thought the point of LMGTFY was to humorously and innocuously get
across the point that a lot of basic questions can be answered
instantly, or just a few key terms and a mouse click away (i.e. "Was
that so hard?") instead of having to write and post a message to a
group and then wait for responses. In this sense, using LMGTFY *is* a
memorable transmission of information beyond just the answer to the
question. It is the meta-information of how to "teach a man to
fish". If someone "LMGTFY'ed" me due to my asking a really Googleable
question, I'd feel I deserved this gentle ribbing and would make a
note to be more diligent in my searches before asking a forum.

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

One could argue, sure. But to me it's just the same as posting GFY
(don't want to upset the tender soulds again with "the F-word".

Are you *still* going on about this thing? Sheesh.

You've made your point. You don't think posting links to Let Me Google
That For You is friendly; you think that "hiding" those links behind
tinyurl is downright hostile; and you think that heaping abuse and
obscenities on the person who posted the link is acceptable behaviour.

You've made it abundantly clear that your concern about keeping this
group friendly only applies to others, not to you. Can we move on now?