trouble building python2.4

Discussion in 'Python' started by Erik Max Francis, Dec 22, 2004.

  1. Matthew Thorley wrote:

    > Greetings, I just downloaded the python2.4 source from python.org and
    > built it the usual way, i.e. ./configure && make. What I don't
    > understand is that the resulting binary, when run, prints this line
    > Python 2.3.4 (#1, Nov 15 2004, 10:29:48) at the top of its banner.
    > Further more, the poplib modules complains when I try to call the
    > poplib.POP3_SSL class, saying that the module has no such class, though
    > the online docs say it does.


    You've got a copy of Python 2.3.4 installed on your system which is in
    your PATH first.

    --
    Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
    San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
    And your daddy died for you / And I'll do the same
    -- India Arie
    Erik Max Francis, Dec 22, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Erik Max Francis

    Steve Holden Guest

    Matthew Thorley wrote:

    > I have got to be the stupidest person on the face of the planet.


    I'll have you know I don't welcome newcomers to this newsgroup trying to
    steal my hard-won reputation, if you don't mind.

    keeping-it-light-ly y'rs - steve
    --
    Steve Holden http://www.holdenweb.com/
    Python Web Programming http://pydish.holdenweb.com/
    Holden Web LLC +1 703 861 4237 +1 800 494 3119
    Steve Holden, Dec 22, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Greetings, I just downloaded the python2.4 source from python.org and
    built it the usual way, i.e. ./configure && make. What I don't
    understand is that the resulting binary, when run, prints this line
    Python 2.3.4 (#1, Nov 15 2004, 10:29:48) at the top of its banner.
    Further more, the poplib modules complains when I try to call the
    poplib.POP3_SSL class, saying that the module has no such class, though
    the online docs say it does.

    I read the README and I didn't see anything about having to pass options
    to configure to get it to build version 2.4. I appears to me that the
    tarball I downloaded wasn't really python2.4, even though it was
    'official' and named Python-2.4.tgz.

    Can anyone please tell me what might of happened, or if they have had a
    similar experience?

    Thanks
    -Matthew
    Matthew Thorley, Dec 22, 2004
    #3
  4. Erik Max Francis wrote:
    > Matthew Thorley wrote:
    >
    >> Greetings, I just downloaded the python2.4 source from python.org and
    >> built it the usual way, i.e. ./configure && make. What I don't
    >> understand is that the resulting binary, when run, prints this line
    >> Python 2.3.4 (#1, Nov 15 2004, 10:29:48) at the top of its banner.
    >> Further more, the poplib modules complains when I try to call the
    >> poplib.POP3_SSL class, saying that the module has no such class,
    >> though the online docs say it does.

    >
    >
    > You've got a copy of Python 2.3.4 installed on your system which is in
    > your PATH first.
    >

    I have got to be the stupidest person on the face of the planet. Thanks
    very much. I was in the Python-2.4 dir, but I didn't call python with
    ../python. I can't believe I missed that.

    Thanks again
    -Matthew
    Matthew Thorley, Dec 22, 2004
    #4
  5. Erik Max Francis

    Tim Peters Guest

    [Matthew Thorley]
    >> I have got to be the stupidest person on the face of the planet.


    [Steve Holden]
    > I'll have you know I don't welcome newcomers to this newsgroup
    > trying to steal my hard-won reputation, if you don't mind.


    In all fairness, Matthew did present evidence to support his claim.
    For all we can tell from the above, Steve, you're merely asserting
    that you enjoy unparalled stupidity, and may very well possess enough
    intelligence to try reaping the benefits of others' boneheaded
    mistakes through slick but empty rhetoric.

    Of course the old-timers here know the truth of it, but in fairness to
    Matthew you should really, say, type out the lyrics to "God Save the
    Queen" a hundred or so times, and then ask why stupid Unicode doesn't
    have a stupid .pop() method anyway.

    god-save-our-gracious-queen-
    long-live-our-noble-queen-
    god-save-the-queen-
    send-her-victorious-
    happy-and-glorious-
    long-to-reign-over-us-
    god-save-the-queen-
    stupid-unicode-pop-ly y'rs - tim
    Tim Peters, Dec 22, 2004
    #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. Xavier
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    405
    Xavier
    Aug 6, 2003
  2. Skip Montanaro
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    418
    Thomas Heller
    Aug 7, 2003
  3. vincent wehren
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,723
    vincent wehren
    Dec 12, 2003
  4. snacktime
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    553
    Dan Sommers
    Feb 22, 2005
  5. Uwe Mayer

    changing from python2.3 to python2.4

    Uwe Mayer, Apr 8, 2005, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    290
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=
    Apr 9, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page