> Adding it to Fink's 10.4/unstable tree is a matter of seconds, so I
> did it.
Thanks for putting this together. I switched to unstable and was
able to install visual-py25 without problems. I haven't exercised it
extensively yet, but I can open a window and create basic shapes
(sphere, cube). [Update: I took some time to run it over some more
(much more) complex examples and haven't had any trouble]
> I am, however, not completely comfortable with these pythonXX
> because I don't know if they wouldn't ultimately also require
> corresponding variants for the boost-python libraries. Currently I am
> building the libboost_python libraries with the version of python that
> comes with OSX, which is python-2.3. This is then linked into the
> cvisualmodule.so which is ultimately run under python-2.5. On starting
> vpython2.5, the python shell complains mildly about differing APIs,
> in my (very few) tests it did run correctly. I cannot exclude that
> will be other situations where this leads to serious problems, though.
When I import visual, I do get the following error, although it
appears to work OK:
>>> from visual import *
RuntimeWarning: Python C API version mismatch for module cvisual:
This Python has API version 1013, module cvisual has version 1012.
I assume that is the warning you were talking about?
Under the assumption that Python2.5 extensions were binary
compatible, as long as it was the same version, I naively tried
moving cvisualpython.so and visual/ to the site-packages directory of
my framework build of Python2.5, but no such luck:
>>> from visual import *
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
python2.5/site-packages/visual/__init__.py", line 15, in <module>
python2.5/site-packages/visual/array_backend.py", line 1, in <module>
lib/python2.5/site-packages/cvisualmodule.so, 2): Symbol not found:
Referenced from: /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/
Expected in: /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/
> Rearranging the packaging of the boost libraries so that the
> libboost_python libs would inhabit different packages corresponding to
> different python versions would require some work for which I haven't
> had the time yet.
Well, I certainly appreciate what you've done so far.
> So for now I am just waiting for reports on working/non-working
> visual-py25 (and visual-py24 for that matter) installations.
Looks good here.
>> Ultimately, some are hoping for a vpython that does not require fink.
>> Do you have an opinion as to what might be the best path towards
> I am not the right person to ask about this. In my opinion, every Mac
> user should install Fink ;-)
> What might be more interesting is to get rid of the X11 dependency and
> build a vpython that runs with Apple's python and aqua graphics.
> Fink or
> not Fink is not the question.
I think you've nailed the crux of the matter. What is wanted is (in
order of importance):
1. Run under Aqua with no dependencies on X11 (and thus no need for
2. Integrate with other tools that run under a framework build of
Python (so, for instance, VPython programs could be packaged with
py2app, could run in the same process as PyObjC programs, could
interact with PyGame, etc.)
I think there is some resistance to Fink because of perhaps some
instability in earlier versions, but more importantly, because Fink
tends to bring along more Linuxisms and retain a dependency on X11
rather than integrating with Aqua. At least, that has been my
impression, whether fairly or not.
>> Untangling vpython from its boost dependencies does not seem
>> I see that you maintain the boost fink packages. But is boost itself
>> dependent upon fink if it is to be used as a dependency on OS X??
I could live with (but never love) Boost, if VPython could play
nicely as an OS X citizen (no X11, framework build of Python).
Thanks also for the insights into how Fink packages are built. That
process has been opaque to me up until now, but I feel like you've
given me enough to get started.
"Why is Virtual Reality always posited in terms of space, when time
is the only real commodity left?" --Rich Gold