[Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?
Mon Feb 4 19:09:50 CST 2013
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Charles R Harris
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Robert Kern <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> > Hi,
>> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Ralf Gommers <email@example.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> MSVC + Intel Fortran + MKL, yes. But those aren't free. So how can you
>> >> provide an Amazon image for those?
>> > You can make an image that is not public, I guess. I suppose anyone
>> > who uses the image would have to have their own licenses for the Intel
>> > stuff? Does anyone have experience of this?
>> You need to purchase one license per developer:
> I think 64 bits on windows is best pushed off to 1.7.1 or 1.8. It would be a
> bit much to get it implemented in the next week or two.
The problem with not providing these binaries is that they are at the
bottom of everyone's stack, so a delay in numpy holds everyone back.
I can't find completely convincing stats, but it looks as though 64
bit windows 7 is now the most common version of Windows, at least for
Gamers  around now, and it was getting that way for everyone in
It don't think it reflects well on on us that we don't appear to
support 64 bits out of the box; just for example, R already has a 32
bit / 64 bit installer.
If I understand correctly, the options for doing this right now are:
1) Minimal cost in time : ask Christophe nicely whether we can
distribute his binaries via the Numpy page
2) Small cost in time / money : pay for licenses for Ondrej or me or
someone to install the dependencies on my Berkeley machine / an Amazon
Ralf : I suppose we qualify for the free licenses you referred to
earlier ?  . I guess that covers us for the Numpy build? Then
it's only a question of paying for ifort licenses when it comes to do
the Scipy build?
So, if the cost of option 2 is too high, how about option 1?
More information about the NumPy-Discussion