Re: [MiNT] Python modules

[Paul Wratt <paul.wratt@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Miro Kropacek <miro.kropacek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If the project isn't very complicated, writing your own Makefiles
>> (using GNU Make wildcard, pattern replacement and suffix rules)
>> for it might be faster.  Then it will compile faster too. :-)
>
> The trouble is it is quite complicated :)
>
> But: success! I not only managed to compile python static but I also managed
> to cross compile it. And best part: I can't take credit for any of of it,
> embedded guys rule ;-)
>
> If someone interested, I can publish Python 2.6 with the most common
> modules, CMake (wasn't that trivial to compile either) and SCons as classic
> .tar.bz2 packages for /usr/local. Btw, that CMake was quite nice test case
> for g++, it heavily uses templates and stuff, I needed to increase stack for
> several hundreds of KB. But for both Python and CMake all tests passed OK!
>
> --
> MiKRO / Mystic Bytes
> http://mikro.atari.org
>

This is exceptional, as I had no problems compileing latest CMake with
2.95 but the binary exited with self reference error  (it was just a
test so I did not look into it).

CMake is required for JAM to build, which is required by a lot of
projects nowadays..

Thanks for the work, and yes the Python binaries will be a great help
too. Can you place diffs on the same page, as testing with other
modules may be needed..

Paul