[Numpy-discussion] 1.4.0 installer fails on OSX 10.6.2
Thu Jan 7 20:29:22 CST 2010
On 5-Jan-10, at 7:02 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
>> Pretty sure the python.org binaries are 32-bit only. I still think
>> it's sensible to prefer the
> waiting the rest of this sentence.. ;-)
I had meant to say 'sensible to prefer the Python.org version' though
in reality I'm a little miffed that Python.org isn't providing Ron's 4-
way binaries, since he went to the trouble of adding support for
building them. Grumble grumble.
>> I'm not really a fan of packages polluting /usr/local, I'd rather the
>> tree appear /opt/packagename
> well, /opt has kind of been co-opted by macports.
I'd forgotten about that.
>> or /usr/local/packagename instead, for
>> ease of removal
> wxPython gets put entirely into:
> which isn't bad.
Ah, yeah, that isn't bad either.
>> but the general approach of "stash somewhere and put
>> a .pth in both site-packages" seems fine to me.
> OK -- what about simply punting and doing two builds: one 32 bit, and
> one 64 bit. I wonder if we need 64bit PPC at all? I know I'm running
> bit hardware, but never ran a 64 bit OS on it -- I wonder if anyone
I've built for ppc64 before, and in fact discovered a long-standing
bug in the way ppc64 was detected. The fact that nobody found it
before me is probably evidence that it is nearly never used. It could
be useful in a minority of situations but I don't think it's going to
be worth it for most people.
More information about the NumPy-Discussion