Author egaudry
Recipients aheider, cgohlke, christian.heimes, egaudry, jdetaeye, koen, lemburg, loewis, mhammond, ntouran, zhirsch
Date 2009-12-01.10:54:02
SpamBayes Score 7.21999e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1259664844.68.0.308300503824.issue4120@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I came across this (very) interesting thread after experiencing some
redistribution issue with a python(2.6)-based package built with msvc9
compiler.

I used to struggled with the SxS Microsoft policy in the past. After I
finally went for the private assembly/crt runtime redistribution
solution, I always succeeded to deliver a stand-alone package to any
windows host around (I got full control on what's actually build and
distribute). 

Having now (using the disutils module) the manifest file embedded in the
python extension actually forbids this redistribution solution, for the
reasons that have been posted here (SxS policy), unless a private
assembly/crt runtime is provided next to each built extension. IMHO,
this is not a convenient (and common) way to redistribute a software.

This is why I fully agree with the propositions that were made here,
i.e. not embedding manifest into a python extension built with the
distutils module and msvc.

Could anyone tell us if a decision has been made about such a change ?

Thanks,
Eloi
History
Date User Action Args
2009-12-01 10:54:04egaudrysetrecipients: + egaudry, lemburg, loewis, mhammond, christian.heimes, koen, aheider, zhirsch, jdetaeye, cgohlke, ntouran
2009-12-01 10:54:04egaudrysetmessageid: <1259664844.68.0.308300503824.issue4120@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2009-12-01 10:54:02egaudrylinkissue4120 messages
2009-12-01 10:54:02egaudrycreate