Mark Hammond <mhamm...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment: I'm failing to get a new pywin32 out of the door due to this issue. I've spent a few hours playing with this and I think the analysis is generally correct here. The key thing is that when using distutils, the extensions end up with a manifest (albeit one without a reference to the CRT) whereas the extensions shipped with Python have no manifest at all.
I agree with Martin that it seems strange the CRT fails to be used even though the CRT is obviously already loaded, but it seems to be a fact. I can't find much on this, but suspect it relates to the different "activation contexts" in use and how the activation contexts are designed to allow side-by-side loading of DLLs; Windows doesn't know if the version of the DLL already loaded is suitable. I also guess that the fact the DLL has *any* manifest means they use a more strict interpretation of things (ie, refuse to use already loaded ones) whereas a dll with no manifest gets given a little more slack. I can confirm that with the attached patch, pywin32 builds and installs fine on a machine without the CRT installed globally - so I'm +1 on this patch with one caveat: The check for '.pyd' should either be expanded to include '.dll', or else the check should just use the 'target_desc == CCompiler.EXECUTABLE' condition already used. I'm happy to make the change once I get some feedback and/or guidance about where I should check this in - I believe it is too late for python 2.6 which is a shame... ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7833> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
