Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Adam Atlas a écrit : > Doesn't seem to work. I guess zipimport doesn't support that by > default... but if I remember correctly, Setuptools adds that. Maybe > I'll take a look at how it does it (I think by extracting the .so to / > tmp?) or to another known location, IIRC. > and see how easy it

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

I updated it. http://adamatlas.org/2007/03/Squisher-0.2.py New Things: - It supports C extensions within squished packages. - It supports including squished packages within other squished packages. (That is, you can have a package that includes a .pyc generated by this, and turn that whole package

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Doesn't seem to work. I guess zipimport doesn't support that by default... but if I remember correctly, Setuptools adds that. Maybe I'll take a look at how it does it (I think by extracting the .so to / tmp?) and see how easy it would be to integrate it here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/lis

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

On Mar 5, 12:31 am, "Adam Atlas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right now I'm just testing and polishing up the code... in the > meantime, any comments? How does this work with compiled extension modules? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Okay, here's the prototype... It's meant to be run as a command line program (pass it a directory or a zip file as an argument). By default it will save the new file to the argument's base name plus '.pyc'. You can override this with -o. Obviously it'

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Stef, What Adam is talking about has nothing to do with windows or *nix. He's talking about packing one or more .py files into a single archive, which can be imported just like the regular .py files. This means you can distribute a whole bunch of module files/dirs as a single .pyc file. It just ma

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Stef Mientki wrote: > > As a normal Windows user, >I'm used to run an install file, > and hit just 1 button. > As a normal Windows programmer, >I'm used to create a simple Inno-setup file, > and my users can behave as a simplistic and happy Windows user. > > But I guess the needed

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Stef Mientki a écrit : > Adam Atlas wrote: > >> Ah... heh, sorry, I misread your message as "a much more convenient >> way" rather than "much more than a convenient way". Anyway, I >> understand that, and I do indeed find setuptools useful and use it on >> a regular basis. >> >> But my other point

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Adam Atlas a écrit : > Ah... heh, sorry, I misread your message as "a much more convenient > way" rather than "much more than a convenient way". !-) (snip) > But my other points still stand. Indeed. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Adam, Sounds like a nice idea to me. Pretty ingenious use of the zip/ bytecode headers and all too. Post a message when you release it please. Regards, Jordan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Adam Atlas wrote: > Ah... heh, sorry, I misread your message as "a much more convenient > way" rather than "much more than a convenient way". Anyway, I > understand that, and I do indeed find setuptools useful and use it on > a regular basis. > > But my other points still stand. This would be a mo

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Ah... heh, sorry, I misread your message as "a much more convenient way" rather than "much more than a convenient way". Anyway, I understand that, and I do indeed find setuptools useful and use it on a regular basis. But my other points still stand. This would be a moot point if setuptools were pa

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

This could be easily made into a distutils extension (which was my intention all along, though that's not implemented yet). That's not the point. This is not intended as a "way to package source code". It's analogous to bdist, not sdist. The convenience gain is for the users, not (primarily) the de

Re: Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

Adam Atlas a écrit : (snip) > If you make a ZIP archive of > this and run it through Squisher, you'll get a single .pyc file which > can be imported by any Python installation anywhere just like any > other module, without requiring users to install any supporting > mechanisms (like setuptools), s

Squisher -- a lightweight, self-contained alternative to eggs?

I wrote this little program called Squisher that takes a ZIP file containing Python modules and generates a totally self-contained .pyc file that imports a specified module therein. (Conveniently, Python's bytecode parser ignores anything after an end marker, and the zipimport mechanism skips any n