Hurm, will __file__ will still be set even for pre-compiled DLLs so it's not picking up a pre-compiled version. What about sys.builtin_module_names on 2.6? Does it have os listed in there somehow? And does os have the same members at the nt module or does it have significantly more? For example if I do "set(dir(os)) - set(dir(nt))" there's 40 more members in os (os just builds on top of the underlying nt/unix/other platform built-in module so if these are getting aliased somehow then os would have the same members).
From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Ken MacDonald Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:28 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] change in standard library behavior for compiled .exe/.dll??? Funny, we did exactly that yesterday. When we run the .exe on the new version (2.7), we get a sys.path of [".", "...\current_dir\DLLs", "...\current_dir\Lib"], and the os.__file__ was "...\current_dir\os.py" - where I happened to have put os.py. We rebuilt our 2.6 app, and sys.path was the same, but os.__file__ was just plain "os" - no file path listed. Almost as if it was built into the application DLL, which is where we think it used to be.... Ken On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Dino Viehland <di...@microsoft.com<mailto:di...@microsoft.com>> wrote: AFAIK nothing has changed between 2.7 and 2.6 w/ how we'd go about finding the standard library - and we certainly never had anything which would automatically include it. Do you have something which works on 2.6 where you could print out os.__file__ (or some other module you're importing from the std lib) and sys.path? That'd at least tell us where/how we're picking these up from in the previous version of the app and maybe we can work out what's going on from there. From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com> [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com>] On Behalf Of Ken MacDonald Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 1:05 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] change in standard library behavior for compiled .exe/.dll??? Hi Dino, On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Dino Viehland <di...@microsoft.com<mailto:di...@microsoft.com>> wrote: How are you distributing your app? I'm assuming you're going to have something like: MyApp\ MyApp.exe MyApp.dll IronPython.dll IronPython.Modules.DLL ... This is exactly how we have been distributing our app up to IP 2.6 with .NET 3.5. We also have another DLL with our resources in it; XAML, icons, image files, but no code per se. We have been distributing it this way to customer systems that do NOT have IronPython installed, or any sign of the std. library, or "os.py" specifically, and it's been working really, really well. We're trying to understand what changed moving to IP 2.7 and .NET 4.0 that we should have to care about distributing the std. library now. The way it was before was quite simple and robust; deliver a small handful of files and it just worked, very easy to keep track of. Now instead of distributing 5 files, we suddenly need to distribute 500??? We've figured out that it certainly COULD work as described below, but it seems like a giant step backwards on several fronts, including the potential for folks to maliciously or accidentally tamper with the std lib. sources and affect the functioning of our app. So, how do we get back to the old/better functionality? On a slightly related note, our app imports some package directories in addition, e.g. "import ctypes". When python encounters a directory import, it looks for __init__.py in the directory, and derives the package import directions from there, as I understand it. However, I can't specify the "ctypes" directory as an argument to the pyc.py compile app; just causes it to croak. If I explicitly specified paths like "lib\ctypes\__init__.py" and the other files in the ctypes subdirectory, it seems like "import ctypes" would have no clue that the __init__.py that was compiled in had anything to do with the "ctypes" package, as the path names are presumably irrelevant to the compiler as long as they specify a python file. I'm considering mod'ing pyc.py to be able to incorporate a list of std lib modules to compile in: simple enough for the standalone files like "os.py", but the compile modules don't seem to be able to grok what to do with a package subdirectory. Ken You should be able to also distribute the standard library and just drop it into a Lib directory next to IronPython.dll: MyApp\ MyApp.exe MyApp.dll IronPython.dll IronPython.Modules.DLL ... Lib\ os.py That lib dir should be on sys.path at startup and so it should be available for importing. From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com> [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com>] On Behalf Of Ken MacDonald Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 11:42 AM To: Michael Foord Cc: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] change in standard library behavior for compiled .exe/.dll??? Hi Michael, I started out on implementing this, but I am importing maybe a dozen of the std. library modules, which then import others, and so on. It appears that eventually, most of the std modules would have to be imported explicitly (perhaps 400 or so files) which might make for a somewhat cumbersome command line, incidentally also about 20K characters too long :-). I'm hoping to find a way to get this to work as well as it did under IP 2.5 / .NET 3.5. Noah: what kind of problems are YOU having with pyc.py under 4.0? Maybe one of us can suggest something if we have an understanding of what you're trying to do. Ken On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:08 AM, Michael Foord <mich...@voidspace.org.uk<mailto:mich...@voidspace.org.uk>> wrote: On 05/10/2010 22:27, Ken MacDonald wrote: I've been looking at the .exe's we built - using pyc.py - with IP 2.5/.Net 3.5 and IP2.7 / .NET 4.0. In the 2.7 .exe, it appears that the imports (like "os") are not being built into the .exe/.dll, but instead are required to be imported in source form, e.g. "os.py" must be somewhere on sys.path. In the IP 2.5 .exe's we had been building, they would run fine on machines without the IP standard library installed at all, in other words, with "os.py" not present on the machine at all. We did notice that the .exe in question went from being 2.9 MB in it's IP 2.5 incarnation, down to 1.2 MB in the IP 2.7 version, and the newer version requires that the source code for the IP standard library be on the path. Is this a deliberate change in behavior? We never had to package the standard library source when we sent out .exe's to customers before Hmmm... I'm pretty sure I always had to explicitly compile and bundle the standard library with previous versions of Python. Odd. Anyway, the simple solution is to ensure that you add any standard library modules you use to the set you compile and ship. All the best, Michael Foord >"os" is not an assembly but a Python module from the standard library. You >need to ensure >that the Python standard library (or the parts that you use >and their dependencies) is on the >path. All the best, Michael Foord and how do I ensure it gets found from my .exe - is there a specific env. variable, or the Windows %PATH% e.v., or something I haven't AddReference'd to???? Thanks, Ken _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com -- http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog READ CAREFULLY. By accepting and reading this email you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer. -- http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog READ CAREFULLY. By accepting and reading this email you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com<mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
