From: Matthew B. <mat...@gm...> - 2014-06-03 20:45:16
|
Hi, On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Russell E. Owen <ro...@uw...> wrote: > In article > <CAL...@ma...>, > Chris Barker <chr...@no...> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Matthew Brett >> <mat...@gm...> >> wrote: >> >> > > what is this going to do on OS-X 10.7 and 10.8 systems running homebrew >> > or >> > > macports pythons? It seems this list could get pretty long! >> > >> Yes, it could, but this list: >> > >> > so we would have to add all those if we wanted to support them... >> >> >> >> > https://www.adium.im/sparkle/?year=2014&week=22&graph=bar#osVersion >> > >> > >> very interesting stats! I wonder how representative those are? Makes we >> think we can drop 32 bit support, too. Maybe the newest 2.7 py.org binaries >> could be 64 bit only. It would simplify things a bit. > > I hope you will not drop 32-bit support yet.. I still use it to > distribute some Tkinter apps. All recent versions of ActiveState Tcl/Tk > 8.5 have a nasty crashing bug that I have not found a workaround for, > and old enough versions that don't have the bug need to run in 32-bit > mode on Mavericks. Do you need 32 bit support for the wheels or just for the MacPython binaries? It's getting harder to build 32 / 64 bit universal binaries these days... Cheers, Matthew |