Le ven 11 août 2006 19:48, Ethan Glasser-Camp a écrit : > Hi guys, > > I asked on #debian-python a few days ago about the odds of Stackless > being packaged. MadCoder, speaking unofficially, told me that this > question would be better to ask on this list, and suggested I do some > research about the compatibility between Stackless and vanilla > CPython. I went to the Stackless mailing list and asked some > questions and I think the answer is: "If Stackless isn't binary > compatible, it is considered a bug in Stackless." > > Here is the thread I started: > > http://www.stackless.com/pipermail/stackless/2006-August/001876.html > > .pyc files should be compatible (compiler and interpreter are not > changed by Stackless). > > Stackless is 100% compatible with pure Python code. > > There has been an occurrence of a C extension (PyQT) not being binary > compatible, but this is a rare case, and the Stackless people are > interested in resolving the bug if it can be reproduced. well, then all is not lost, one could package it, and install it either as an alternative of vanilla python, or anything like that. If it's able to use the same module path for the extensions, and its own path for its own private things, that should just work withoug duplicating all the work. now one has to take care of that, I don't know if anyone that has packaging skills is interested into packaging stackless python. At least, it does not sounds horrible, one has to give it a try I'd say. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpKNnJXQpM8h.pgp
Description: PGP signature