On 3-okt-2005, at 16:56, Stephen Langer wrote:


I don't know if this is possible, although I'd guess it is not.


That's too bad.  Is there a reason for it?  I'd volunteer to work on
modifying distutils so that it can build a .dylib, but I am not an
expert on library formats.  I don't really know the difference
between a .so and a .dylib, except that one of them works and the
other doesn't.  Can someone point me in the direction of a good
reference on the topic?

I'd guess that nobody has needed this functionality badly enough to
volunteer extending distutils :-).

The main difference between a .so and a .dylib is that the former is
a bundle and the latter is a dylib. Dynamic libraries and loadable objects are two different beasts on OS X. See the manpages for ld(1) and Mach- O(5)
for more information.

W.r.t. extending distutils: extending the 'clib' might be the best way,
although I must say that I've never used that command.

Ronald


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Reply via email to