Peter N <spacey-bugs.python....@ssr.com> added the comment: On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:31:38PM +0000, J??rg Prante wrote: > > J??rg Prante <joergpra...@gmx.de> added the comment: > > > Without knowing the impact of the generic approach you've taken > > in your patch we simply cannot just apply it. If you can prove that > > the patch doesn't break other platforms or configuration setups, > > that would help a lot. > > I was able to build Python 2.5 on Solaris 10 Sparc, Mac OS X PPC, Linux > PPC/Intel, all 32bit and 64bit, shared and static, only with Bob's help.
Ditto for python 2.5 on Solaris 10 x86 64-bit. It was simply impossible without these patches. > It's not a proof. It's not mathematical correct. But it works. Grab all > your avalaible test platforms and try for yourself what Bob's patch will > 'break', and report it. > > Sorry, but that meta discussions about correct builds are not what a bug > report should be used for. Such improvements are up to developer forums > where you can design "correct" Python build scripts and discuss them > over and over again. Agreed. +1 from me if it counts for anything (which it probably doesn't). -Peter ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1628484> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com