From: E. A. T. <e.a...@te...> - 2004-06-05 01:02:33
|
Hello, I wrote an app in Python 2.2.2/wxPython 2.4.2.4. While at that, I used py2exe 0.4.1 to generate my dist under WinXP. The main .exe file was about 800kB. Now I upgraded to Python 2.3.3/wxPython 2.5.1.5/py2exe 0.5.0 and I'm facing an issue: my .exe file is only 44kB and there's a 'library.zip' file that contains several modules. I guess on 0.4.1 the required modules were inside the .exe file (there wasn't a 'library.zip' here and everything worked fine). How should I tell py2exe 0.5.0 that I still want them inside the .exe file? Thanks in advance, -- tacao |
From: Thomas H. <th...@py...> - 2004-06-08 20:22:50
|
"E. A. Tacao" <e.a...@te...> writes: > Hello, > > I wrote an app in Python 2.2.2/wxPython 2.4.2.4. While at that, I used > py2exe 0.4.1 to generate my dist under WinXP. The main .exe file was > about 800kB. > > Now I upgraded to Python 2.3.3/wxPython 2.5.1.5/py2exe 0.5.0 and I'm > facing an issue: my .exe file is only 44kB and there's a 'library.zip' > file that contains several modules. > > I guess on 0.4.1 the required modules were inside the .exe file (there > wasn't a 'library.zip' here and everything worked fine). How should I > tell py2exe 0.5.0 that I still want them inside the .exe file? There's no way. It is now always in the zip file, the zip can be shared between several (possibly) related exe or dll files which you can build with one setup script. Technically, it should be possible to append the zip archive to the exe file itself, but what would you gain? One file less to distribute - is it worth the effort? Thomas |
From: E. A. T. <e.a...@te...> - 2004-06-08 20:57:38
|
In Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 5:21:16 PM, Thomas wrote: TH> "E. A. Tacao" <e.a...@te...> writes: >> I wrote an app in Python 2.2.2/wxPython 2.4.2.4. While at that, I used >> py2exe 0.4.1 to generate my dist under WinXP. The main .exe file was >> about 800kB. >> >> Now I upgraded to Python 2.3.3/wxPython 2.5.1.5/py2exe 0.5.0 and I'm >> facing an issue: my .exe file is only 44kB and there's a 'library.zip' >> file that contains several modules. >> >> I guess on 0.4.1 the required modules were inside the .exe file (there >> wasn't a 'library.zip' here and everything worked fine). How should I >> tell py2exe 0.5.0 that I still want them inside the .exe file? TH> There's no way. It is now always in the zip file, the zip can be TH> shared between several (possibly) related exe or dll files which TH> you can build with one setup script. Technically, it should be TH> possible to append the zip archive to the exe file itself, but TH> what would you gain? One file less to distribute - is it worth the TH> effort? I think so. Some apps are too shy and don't like curious end users to be looking inside their 'library.zip' files. If I may suggest, I think there should be a way to select between the old 'all-in-exe' style and the new 'library.zip' style. Do you think it's doable/feasible? -- tacao |
From: Thomas H. <th...@py...> - 2004-06-09 07:04:15
|
"E. A. Tacao" <e.a...@te...> writes: > In Tuesday, June 8, 2004, 5:21:16 PM, Thomas wrote: > > TH> "E. A. Tacao" <e.a...@te...> writes: > >>> I wrote an app in Python 2.2.2/wxPython 2.4.2.4. While at that, I used >>> py2exe 0.4.1 to generate my dist under WinXP. The main .exe file was >>> about 800kB. >>> >>> Now I upgraded to Python 2.3.3/wxPython 2.5.1.5/py2exe 0.5.0 and I'm >>> facing an issue: my .exe file is only 44kB and there's a 'library.zip' >>> file that contains several modules. >>> >>> I guess on 0.4.1 the required modules were inside the .exe file (there >>> wasn't a 'library.zip' here and everything worked fine). How should I >>> tell py2exe 0.5.0 that I still want them inside the .exe file? > > TH> There's no way. It is now always in the zip file, the zip can be > TH> shared between several (possibly) related exe or dll files which > TH> you can build with one setup script. Technically, it should be > TH> possible to append the zip archive to the exe file itself, but > TH> what would you gain? One file less to distribute - is it worth the > TH> effort? > > I think so. Some apps are too shy and don't like curious end users to > be looking inside their 'library.zip' files. The problem with this is that it's possible anyway. If winzip is installed, right clicking an exe-file which contains a zip-archive in explorer automatically gets 'Extract to ...' and 'Run with Winzip' menu entries, and doing a drag-drop operation with the right mouse button also, in addition to the usual 'Create Shortcut' entry. If you want to obscure the zip-archive imo the best way is to specify a filename with a different extension, say 'zipfile=shared.dll' for example. At least this will avoid the winzip 'problem'. > If I may suggest, I think > there should be a way to select between the old 'all-in-exe' style and > the new 'library.zip' style. Do you think it's doable/feasible? In priciple it would be possible - zipimport can handle archives prepended by an exe-stub. I'll think about it - but it will not be in the soon-to-be-released 0.5.1. Thomas |
From: E. A. T. <e.a...@te...> - 2004-06-09 07:29:35
|
In Wednesday, June 9, 2004, 4:03:49 AM, Thomas wrote: [snip] TH> If winzip is installed, right clicking an exe-file which contains TH> a zip-archive in explorer automatically gets 'Extract to ...' and TH> 'Run with Winzip' menu entries, and doing a drag-drop operation TH> with the right mouse button also, in addition to the usual 'Create TH> Shortcut' entry. Not to mention that XP has a feature that shows zip files as directories. TH> If you want to obscure the zip-archive imo the best way is to TH> specify a filename with a different extension, say TH> 'zipfile=shared.dll' for example. At least this will avoid the TH> winzip 'problem'. Yes. I'll try this. >> If I may suggest, I think there should be a way to select between >> the old 'all-in-exe' style and the new 'library.zip' style. Do you >> think it's doable/feasible? TH> In priciple it would be possible - zipimport can handle archives TH> prepended by an exe-stub. I'll think about it - but it will not be TH> in the soon-to-be-released 0.5.1. Ok, I'll also be waiting for the 0.6. 8^) Thank you for you attention and suggestions. BTW I'm using py2exe since 0.3.3 (May of 2002) and I'd like to congratulate you and everybody involved for your good work with it! Thanks again. -- tacao |