>> >> Isn't this already the recommended/standard practice? Also, the time >> it takes to run configure.py is so short that why not just make >> running configure.py an automated process that is executed every time > > -1 This trashes the console output with much to much messages. > > Plus: it's good Computer Science style to not do unnecessary jobs, just > because they are "cheep". >
The console output is one thing, but as we have been discussing, it *is* necessary to do these jobs sometimes. So, running configure.py every time could be considered like running a check procedure. It's much safer to run the check every time rather than rely on the user to do it when it is absolutely necessary. On a related topic, is there any plan to create a PerlApp (part of ActiveState PDK) kind of binary tool for pyinstaller, that will be completely self-contained? It could come with a GUI-interface with typical config options and then the user could just run it without worrying about anything else. (This app could offer verbose output etc. for those who want it). If pyinstaller had this option, I'm sure it would very quickly become the number one choice for packaging (if it isn't already) and would open so many doors to Python GUI development. Just a thought... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PyInstaller" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyinstaller?hl=en.
