On 6-jan-05, at 14:04, Jack Jansen wrote:
On 6 Jan 2005, at 00:49, Martin v. Löwis wrote:The "new" solution is basically to go back to the Unix way of building an extension: link it against nothing and sort things out at runtime. Not my personal preference, but at least we know that loading an extension into one Python won't bring in a fresh copy of a different interpreter or anything horrible like that.
This sounds good, except that it only works on OS X 10.3, right? What about older versions?
10.3 or later. For older OSX releases (either because you build Python on 10.2 or earlier, or because you've set MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET to a value of 10.2 or less) we use the old behaviour of linking with "-framework Python".
Wouldn't it be better to link with the actual dylib inside the framework on 10.2? Otherwise you can no longer build 2.3 extensions after you've installed 2.4.
Ronald _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
