RetroSearch Browse

Mon Oct 31 19:36:43 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-October/114284.html

In article 
<CACac1F_V6_6+uG9qfqBJtuokz0HXO53hsXX3Ptap=O8+pxTpJA at mail.gmail.com>,
 Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 October 2011 18:04, Ned Deily <nad at acm.org> wrote:
> > Has anyone analyzed the current packages on PyPI to see how many provide
> > binary distributions and in what format?
> 
> A very quick and dirty check:
> 
> dmg: 5
> rpm: 12
> msi: 23
> dumb: 132
> wininst: 364
> egg: 2570
> 
> That's number of packages with binary distributions in that format.
> It's hard to be sure about egg distributions, as many of these could
> be pure-python (there's no way I know, from the PyPI metadata, to
> check this).

Thanks.  If you have access to the egg file name, you should be able to 
tell.  AFAIK, eggs with extension modules include the Distutils platform 
name in the file name preceded by a '-', so '-linux', '-win32', 
'-macosx' for the main ones.  Pure python eggs do not contain a platform 
name.  http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyinterval/ is a random example of 
the former.

-- 
 Ned Deily,
 nad at acm.org

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-October/114284.html below:

[Python-Dev] Packaging and binary distributions