[Stackless] MacOS stackless installers needed

Gmail rbabiak at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 15:17:26 CEST 2014


dont remeber off the top of my head, but i didnt need to change the ldflags, just had to set the sdk path like you did, i will have to look at my build script to tell you for sure.

Robert Babiak
Life, baa I will worry about when it is done!

> On Apr 4, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Hervé Coatanhay <herve.coatanhay at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I am having trouble building an installer on Mac OS X 10.9, (I had to
> change build-installer.py to change LDFLAGS).
> 
> @Robert Did you build the last installer on Mavericks with XCode 5.1?
> Did you do anything special ? My command line is:
> 
> ./build-installer.py
> --sdk-path=/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.8.sdk/
> --dep-target=10.8  --universal-archs=intel
> 
> And I had to remove this from LDFLAGS:
> -syslibroot,/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.8.sdk
> 
> I grabbed the source from
> https://bitbucket.org/stackless-dev/stackless and trie to build from
> 2.7-slp branch.
> 
> I'm thinking it is too much changes already just to build an
> installer, I must do something wrong.
> 
> Cheers
> Hervé
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Filip M. Nowak <stackless at oneiroi.net> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> 
>>> On 03.04.2014 15:28, Hervé Coatanhay wrote:
>>> Hi FIlip,
>>> Both MacOS installer and homebrew use the framework-approach. This
>>> left prefix-approach for people that feels like hacking around IMHO.
>> 
>> "hackishness" of prefix-approach is a matter of open discussion I would
>> say. I must admit that I used to prefix-based way (and it is extensively
>> used in many POSIX OSes packaging systems) but I agree that for Mac OS X
>> framework thingy is more proper.
>> 
>>> For Homebrew, it might be as simple as creating a "keg only" Stackless
>>> Formula provided by a "Tap"  on github.
>>> 
>>> Concerning MacOS Installer, as I understand it, we're facing the
>>> following choice:
>>> 
>>>    - provide a Stackless installer which override official CPython
>>> installer (the choice made so far)
>>>    - change build-script.py to change the "framework name"
>> 
>> I would go for the second option (with installer) - but again, it's just
>> me. This would be less confusing, easier and probably safer for packager
>> himself :) . At the end what's the goal? Basically - to provide usable
>> and nice enough instance of Stackless for Mac OS x? If so this would do.
>> 
>>> Does it sum it up well ?
>> 
>> Absolutely.
>> 
>>> Hervé
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Filip M. Nowak <stackless at oneiroi.net> wrote:
>>>> (...)
>> 
>>        All the best,
>>        Filip
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stackless mailing list
>> Stackless at stackless.com
>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless



More information about the Stackless mailing list