On Oct 25, 2013, at 03:47 AM, Andrew Barnert <abarn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
What we're seeing here is a conflict between Python's unfortunateinsistence on using the same compiler toolchain for the main interpreter and anycompiled extensions, and Apple's remorseless dropping of stuff it no longersupports.
Also Python having a single binary for 10.6+. I understand that decision—the only alternatives are to tell 10.6 users they're stuck with 2.7.5/3.3.2 forever, or to double the number of builds and double the packagers' work. But Apple consistently and intentionally makes it hard to support more than 3 (sometimes even 2) major OS X versions at a time, and they do a good job of that.
The only thing that's hard at the moment is supporting PowerPC machines, to do that you need to have an old machine where you can use Xcode 3. Building Intel binaries that work on OSX 10.4 and later is easy, although you must be somewhat careful to avoid using APIs that are not available on older machines (especially when using configure scripts).
I regularly do builds of Python and some 3the party extensions on 10.8 (up to now with Xcode 4, but soon with Xcode 5) that get deployed to a 10.5 machine and that works just fine. You do NOT have to use a 10.5 SDK to build binaries that can be deployed to 10.5.
Regards,
Ronald
_______________________________________________ Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/Pythonmac-SIG
