Re: python 2.7.x on MacOSX: failed dlopen() on .so's

Discussion in 'Python' started by Paul Smith, Nov 14, 2013.

  1. Paul Smith

    Paul Smith Guest

    On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 16:00 -0800, Ned Deily wrote:
    > > The reason I've set PYTHONHOME is ultimately I need this installation to
    > > be relocatable. It's going to be shared across lots of different
    > > systems and they'll have the ability to copy it wherever they want.

    > That could be problematic. You need to be *really* careful about how
    > you do that. You stand a chance with a non-shared installation.

    You mean, --disable-shared? That's what I want, ultimately, but I was
    going to start with the default configuration first.

    I'm discovering that this is tricky. I don't want to bring OS wars into
    it, but this kind of thing is so simple and just works on GNU/Linux. I
    guess I've been spoiled :).

    I'm somewhat dreading my next effort after MacOS: the same thing, on
    Windows :-/.

    And another task, which seems like it will be fun: building GDB on
    MacOSX with Python support enabled...

    > You still should not need to set PYTHONHOME. Also, be aware that
    > executables and libraries built on one version of OS X are not
    > guaranteed to work on other versions, particularly older versions
    > unless you take certain precautions. Even non-shared Pythons on OS X
    > dynamically link with system-supplied libraries which can vary across
    > os releases. And not all libraries are supplied, so, depending on
    > your needs, you may need to supply some additional third-party
    > libraries.

    This is why I'm building on this very old system, and am loath to update

    One saving grace is that while I need my installation to be relocatable,
    I _don't_ need it to be infinitely portable across MacOSX systems. I'm
    using it internally only and so I have some control over the version of
    MacOS and the hardware that it's running on. I don't need to worry
    about non-Intel hardware, or versions of MacOS prior to the one I'm
    using here.

    > For the OS X binary installers, we go to a fair amount of
    > trouble to build Pythons that will work across a range of OS X
    > releases. You might want to consider using one of them as a base.
    > It's usually a lot less work than trying to make it work yourself.

    Hm, that's an idea. I don't HAVE to build Python myself, actually, I
    just need (a) it to be relocatable, and (b) to add these extra modules
    to it so I can use it across systems without installing them
    individually by hand.

    Thanks, I'll look into this further.
    Paul Smith, Nov 14, 2013
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Paul Smith
    Paul Smith
    Nov 13, 2013
  2. Ned Deily
    Ned Deily
    Nov 13, 2013
  3. Ned Deily
    Ned Deily
    Nov 13, 2013
  4. Ned Deily
    Ned Deily
    Nov 14, 2013
  5. Paul Smith
    Paul Smith
    Nov 13, 2013

Share This Page