On 2010-08-13, at 3:36 PM, Ned Deily wrote: > In article <78d65bdb-ab9c-4e8d-9440-4d071d3d8...@activestate.com>, > Sridhar Ratnakumar <sridh...@activestate.com> wrote: >>> [...] >> However, I see all three variants (32, 64, and 2-way) in the default 2.6.6c1 >> install (i.e., internal ActivePython build, though this is likely the case >> for the python.org's 10.5 installer as well): >> >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 12644 10 Aug 15:30 >> /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.6/bin/python2.6-32 >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 12680 10 Aug 15:30 >> /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.6/bin/python2.6-64 >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 24968 10 Aug 15:30 >> /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.6/bin/python2.6-all >> >> But bin/python2.6 itself links to python2.6-32. What about changing that to >> python2.6-all - thus leaving the choice of arch to OS loader instead of the >> Python's build system? > > Off the top of my head (without testing it), I think that would lead to > a potentially somewhat confusing situation where "bin/python2.6" means > 32-bit on 10.5 but 64-bit (or 32-bit, depending on the machine) on 10.6, > with no possibility to override except by using the explicit > python2.6-32 or python2.6-64 forms anyway.
That can be said for the Python 2.7 Mac installer too, no? bin/python2.7 is a multi-arch binary, and bin/python symlinks to bin/python2.7. sridh...@whymac:~/as/apy/trunk > ls -l /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/bin/python2.7* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 25656 4 Jul 14:02 /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/bin/python2.7 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 13580 4 Jul 14:02 /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/bin/python2.7-32 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root admin 1663 4 Jul 14:02 /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/bin/python2.7-config > Plus there is still the > issue of Tk 8.4 vs 8.5: do you have a non-X 64-bit Tk that works on both > 10.5 and 10.6? Not for 10.5 as, the requisite ActiveTcl 8.5 is i386 only, at the moment. On 10.6, ActivePython will work with Apple's Tcl/Tk (both i386 and x86_64). > As for 2.6.6, it would be a bit of a moot point if Ronald doesn't plan > to provide a 64-bit python.org installer for 2.6.6 as there haven't been > any for earlier 2.6.x releases. Agreed. If there isn't going to be an official 64-bit DMG for 2.6.6, then this patch is not required. > Of course, ActiveState and the other > distributors of OS X installers could choose otherwise and, if so, patch > it accordingly. That's what I am currently inclined to do as we are dropping 10.4/ppc support (in favour of 10.5+/x86_64) in upcoming 2.6 releases. > My opinion is that there are enough loose ends that it > is better to focus on 64-bit support on 2.7/3.2 and on 10.6 (and higher) > only. Ok. -srid _______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
