Re: Update to Python 2.3 on Red Hat Linux 9

Discussion in 'Python' started by Bengt Richter, Aug 31, 2003.

  1. On 31 Aug 2003 04:13:11 +0200, (Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?=) wrote:

    > (Jay Bromley) writes:
    >
    >> So the questions is, can I build Python 2.3 so that it recognizes all
    >> the packages that are available to Python 2.2.2? Is this LD_RUN_PATH
    >> stuff?

    >
    >You can't; this is not supported.
    >
    >The ABI has changed, so the old modules just wouldn't work anymore if
    >they were found.
    >
    >> Or do I really need to find out all the libraries in use with
    >> 2.2.2 and compile these for 2.3?

    >
    >Yes.
    >

    Is this highly automated, or a gross PITA?

    Regards,
    Bengt Richter
     
    Bengt Richter, Aug 31, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. (Bengt Richter) writes:

    > >> Or do I really need to find out all the libraries in use with
    > >> 2.2.2 and compile these for 2.3?

    > >
    > >Yes.
    > >

    > Is this highly automated, or a gross PITA?


    Can you elaborate? What is this "this" you are referring to?
    And what do you mean by "highly automated"?

    Regards,
    Martin
     
    Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?=, Aug 31, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 31 Aug 2003 23:18:49 +0200, (Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?=) wrote:

    > (Bengt Richter) writes:
    >
    >> >> Or do I really need to find out all the libraries in use with
    >> >> 2.2.2 and compile these for 2.3?
    >> >
    >> >Yes.
    >> >

    >> Is this highly automated, or a gross PITA?

    >
    >Can you elaborate? What is this "this" you are referring to?
    >And what do you mean by "highly automated"?
    >

    s/this/finding out all the libraries ... and compiling these for 2.3/

    s/highly automated/make -someopts someargs/

    or some setup.py stuff? distutils?

    More or less ;-)

    E.g., for 2.2 I recompiled PIL and zlib from sources on windows, and
    if there was a precanned deal, I missed it & re-invented just enough to get by ;-/

    So I reacted to the OP's question in terms of my own experience, and wonder
    what the current vision is re making upgrading a whole installation to a new version
    easy and reliable.

    Regards,
    Bengt Richter
     
    Bengt Richter, Sep 1, 2003
    #3
  4. (Bengt Richter) writes:

    > >Can you elaborate? What is this "this" you are referring to?
    > >And what do you mean by "highly automated"?
    > >

    > s/this/finding out all the libraries ... and compiling these for 2.3/
    >
    > s/highly automated/make -someopts someargs/
    >
    > or some setup.py stuff? distutils?


    Ah... You should perhaps try to build Python yourself some time and
    see how it works. Obtaining all the prerequisites is a gross PITA, as
    you have to determine what header files and libraries are needed, and
    then determine how your Linux distributor chose to package them - or,
    if you are using a trademark Unix (Solaris, HP-UX), you even might
    have to install (build, configure) the prerequisites.

    Once the prerequisites are present, this is highly automated, and
    distutils figures it all out.

    > E.g., for 2.2 I recompiled PIL and zlib from sources on windows, and
    > if there was a precanned deal, I missed it & re-invented just enough
    > to get by ;-/


    Windows is a different story entirely. You read and follow the
    instructions in PCBuild/README, that's it.

    Regards,
    Martin
     
    Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?=, Sep 1, 2003
    #4
  5. On 01 Sep 2003 07:56:31 +0200, (Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?=) wrote:

    > (Bengt Richter) writes:
    >
    >> >Can you elaborate? What is this "this" you are referring to?
    >> >And what do you mean by "highly automated"?
    >> >

    >> s/this/finding out all the libraries ... and compiling these for 2.3/
    >>
    >> s/highly automated/make -someopts someargs/
    >>
    >> or some setup.py stuff? distutils?

    >
    >Ah... You should perhaps try to build Python yourself some time and
    >see how it works. Obtaining all the prerequisites is a gross PITA, as

    I haven't built Python on Linux or BSD yet. I have re/built other stuff. Some
    things were no-brainers, some not ;-/

    >you have to determine what header files and libraries are needed, and
    >then determine how your Linux distributor chose to package them - or,
    >if you are using a trademark Unix (Solaris, HP-UX), you even might
    >have to install (build, configure) the prerequisites.
    >
    >Once the prerequisites are present, this is highly automated, and
    >distutils figures it all out.
    >

    How about automating the prerequisites part ? Assuming an individual solves the problem
    for her/his platform, is there a mechanism for contributing a script that does all the
    work [1] (assuming a working core installation with standard libs) of making directories
    and gathering 3rd party pieces together from the net and checking versions and dates
    and md5's etc. and building and installing it?

    [1] Of course, you'd want to read such a script carefully and/or check md5's against
    a trusted recommendation post, etc. before running it ;-)

    [1a] BTW, how would you name such a script, assuming it is doing the job for some app xxx version
    yyy for platform zzz?
    [1b] Is there a budding collection somewhere already? On python.org?

    Note that this is a little different from contributing back an enhanced setup.py to
    a 3rd party product author, though not mutually exclusive (and courtesy would demand
    some attempt at coordination, even if no permission issues exist). IOW, porting scripts
    could happen even if the author was too busy to update his/her site's distutil stuff.

    >> E.g., for 2.2 I recompiled PIL and zlib from sources on windows, and
    >> if there was a precanned deal, I missed it & re-invented just enough
    >> to get by ;-/

    >
    >Windows is a different story entirely. You read and follow the
    >instructions in PCBuild/README, that's it.
    >

    Yes -- for the core distribution, using MSVC++6.0 (nice job, Tim et al ;-)
    -- but beyond that (3rd party) ISTM more like a porting job than config and install.
    (I'm sure YMMV by platform).

    So I am wondering if there could be porting scripts in the future, downloadable
    from python.org, so that getting most of the desirable 3rd party stuff and/or upgrading
    them would be a one-stop shopping experience (not that it all should be hosted on python.org,
    just trusted scripts for getting the pieces from their sources and doing the builds and installs).

    Regards,
    Bengt Richter
     
    Bengt Richter, Sep 1, 2003
    #5
    1. Advertising

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. AJ
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    376
  2. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,238
    Malte
    Sep 1, 2005
  3. Avalon1178
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    615
    Martin Honnen
    Sep 3, 2005
  4. Dave In Redmond

    Re: Update to Python 2.3 on Red Hat Linux 9

    Dave In Redmond, Aug 29, 2003, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    404
    Jay Bromley
    Aug 30, 2003
  5. nymano
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    527
    Greger
    Aug 26, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page