robert wrote: > Ben Sizer wrote: > > My opinion is that this is not as big a problem as some may feel that > > it is. Unlike Unix systems, the PATH variable is rarely used. > > It is a big problem. > > It is not less than the majority of Python users (at least those who do > things on the command line) who deal with multiple Python versions.
So you think most Python users have more than one version of Python installed? I disagree - but even if it is true, how come this isn't a big problem on Unix? Can you name a single distribution that doesn't install Python to the path? > This would create funny PATH variables - almost a "psychic behavior with > history". It is quite trivial to see if Python is already on the path, and act differently based on that. > Windows is at all less a multi user system. I don't even know a case where > two (Python) Programmers use _one_ box and then also want separate Python's - > just know home mates (parasites) who occasionally share the web browser or > so... So... that's another reason why there's rarely a problem in setting that PATH variable. > Linking also a default python.exe into the system32 upon a (non-default) > checkbox mark in the installer should be simple, clear and do everything what > 99.9% want - and most "compatible" to *nix. No, it doesn't : the /scripts directory is also important for many Python packages and that isn't addressed by shifting python.exe into system32. -- Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
