We have a large number of PyQt apps on Linux for a special effect studio. We use PyQt apps to manage a large render farm for special effects, examining artwork, playing back renders at high resolutions, and other apps for lighting and compositing, etc.
More of our users are using Mac's and want the same tools on their Mac desktops, so we're starting to build the infrastructure to support them. Currently I'm using MacPorts since it provides a framework Python and Qt for Mac. However, I'm finding the distribution of MacPorts packages to other hosts painful because it puts files in other places besides /opt/local and there is no easy way to dist out new packages to systems. My current solution to disting out new packages to clients is ugly: deactivate all ports so that everything only lives in /opt/local, rsync any changes into /opt/local, then reactivate the ports. Painful and during the upgrade, nothing that relies upon /opt/local will work. I could do this better, but in the end, the package management isn't as nice as dpkg and apt-get. So I want to use switch to Fink for apt-get and use an entire Fink tree. However, Python is not a Framework build. We can't use a X11 build since the performance for playback of renders is not good enough and the users are artists, not developers who would mind using X11. We need the native playback speed at 24 frames per second. Reading some of the other comments on framework Python in the mailing list, one comment was that .apps and frameworks are meant to be relocatable. I'm not interested in building applications where we can just relocate the entire Python tree. We have a complicated set of Python modules with our own versioning system, so my vision is that /sw/bin/aqua-python will always be provided and all our custom module will live in a known location. Any applications can have their Contents/MacOS/Appname be a shell script that just execs the framework python. I should also mention that all our Python code is written to Python 2.4, so we can't use the system's 2.3 Python. Also with 2.5 out, we'd like to move to that for the increased performance. So several questions: 1) Would the Python maintainers be willing to take patches for a framework install? 2) Should this be done on the original python2?.info, or a separate Python package be built, maybe that just installs the files that are new on top of the python2?.info file. Ideally, the Framework install would leverage the non-Framework install. 3) Would it be possible to add the --enable-frameworks to the build? I presume this will break everything, otherwise it would have been done? Could we add symlinks from the framework build back to the non-framework build to support this? Any suggestions would help. I would like to see Fink grow the ability to run Aqua PyQt or PyWxWidgets apps. Regards, Blair -- Blair Zajac, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subversion training, consulting and support http://www.orcaware.com/svn/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
