visualpython-users

[Visualpython-users] MacEnthon

[Gary P. <gp...@ri...>]

Many of you have probably seen the recent unveiling of "MacEnthon"

http://www.scipy.org/wikis/featurerequests/MacEnthon

It's a all-in-one scientific package for python, similar to Enthought 
Python for windows, including scipy, matplotlib, ipython ....   The 
author says that "The goal is to make something that a user can install 
and have running without installing anything else, so it is going to use 
the pre-installed Python (or install its own in the case of Python 2.4)."

It is a "framework" package.

I use the Mac less and less these days, but it is a fixture around here, 
so it won't go away.   I've been *more* than comfortable with the fink 
set-up, and in fact, I wish the MacEnthon effort was a fink package.  
But it's not.

The advertised ease of setup of MacEnthon has *great* appeal:   single 
click installation.   I think the attraction to MacEnthon is going to be 
enormous, leaving us to decide between a complete (too much, in fact) 
scientific environment installed with a single click, *without* vpython, 
versus the rather pesky fink vpython, along with a raft of other 
individual packages, some of which are not updated regularly.

So ... is this new development providing enough reason to develop a 
"framework" vpython?
(Asked in ignorance of the technical details, and a sense of the level 
of effort needed.)

-gary

Re: [Visualpython-users] MacEnthon

[Gary P. <gp...@ri...>]

Gary Pajer wrote:

> Many of you have probably seen the recent unveiling of "MacEnthon"
>
> http://www.scipy.org/wikis/featurerequests/MacEnthon
>
> It's a all-in-one scientific package for python, similar to Enthought 
> Python for windows, including scipy, matplotlib, ipython ....   The 
> author says that "The goal is to make something that a user can 
> install and have running without installing anything else, so it is 
> going to use the pre-installed Python (or install its own in the case 
> of Python 2.4)."
>
> It is a "framework" package.

[...]

>
> So ... is this new development providing enough reason to develop a 
> "framework" vpython?
> (Asked in ignorance of the technical details, and a sense of the level 
> of effort needed.)
>
> -gary


I've had an off-line discussion with someone about the feasibility of 
doing this.  I think that neither of us is competent to comment with 
authority.

I've taken a quick look at the mailing list archives, and I conclude 
that I can't conclude anything.  I suspect that if it were 
straightforward, someone would have already done it.  (If someone has 
done it and reported to this list, and I'm just blind, please speak up.)   

No one has yet commented here, which makes me wonder if there is no 
interest.   While I understand that all of us already have working 
versions of visual, this development promises (I think) to make life 
much easier for newcomers and for us in the future.

MacEnthon is the first and only thing that I've seen that makes me want 
to consider MacPython/"framework"  python. I have no experience with 
it.  If there are good reasons for not using it (other than visual 
python unavailability) I'd appreciate hearing what they are.

I stopped maintaining my Mac at OS 10.2.6.  Do I understand correctly 
that OS 10.3 adopts MacPython as the native python?  IIRC,  OS 10.2.x 
actually had three pythons available, the native one, MacPython and 
Fink's python.  Ugh.

In truth, I had my Mac removed while 10.2.6 was current.  It was too 
much trouble ... impossible in some cases  ... to maintain the python 
packages I wanted (matplotlib, e.g.).  I understand that 10.3 is easier 
because the fink packages are being currently maintained for 10.3.    
But we still have Macs in the labs.  I have not taken on the task of 
installing visual on them, although I think I will have to by next 
September when I start teaching M&I.  The installation and maintenance 
issues were prohibitive. 

So you see how much easier my task (and that of others) would be to have 
a simply installed package, and one that does not require the additional 
complication of  Fink.  Hence the compelling nature of MacEnthon, and my 
desire to have visual run with it.  I wish I had the skills to do it 
myself. 

-gary

Re: [Visualpython-users] MacEnthon

[Jonathan B. <jbr...@ea...>]

On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 09:26 -0500, Gary Pajer wrote:
> Gary Pajer wrote:
> 
> > Many of you have probably seen the recent unveiling of "MacEnthon"
> >
> > http://www.scipy.org/wikis/featurerequests/MacEnthon
> >
> > It's a all-in-one scientific package for python, similar to Enthought 
> > Python for windows, including scipy, matplotlib, ipython ....   The 
> > author says that "The goal is to make something that a user can 
> > install and have running without installing anything else, so it is 
> > going to use the pre-installed Python (or install its own in the case 
> > of Python 2.4)."
> >
> > It is a "framework" package.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >
> > So ... is this new development providing enough reason to develop a 
> > "framework" vpython?
> > (Asked in ignorance of the technical details, and a sense of the level 
> > of effort needed.)
> >
> > -gary
> 
> 
> I've had an off-line discussion with someone about the feasibility of 
> doing this.  I think that neither of us is competent to comment with 
> authority.
> 
> I've taken a quick look at the mailing list archives, and I conclude 
> that I can't conclude anything.  I suspect that if it were 
> straightforward, someone would have already done it.  (If someone has 
> done it and reported to this list, and I'm just blind, please speak up.)   
> 
> No one has yet commented here, which makes me wonder if there is no 
> interest.   While I understand that all of us already have working 
> versions of visual, this development promises (I think) to make life 
> much easier for newcomers and for us in the future.
> 
> MacEnthon is the first and only thing that I've seen that makes me want 
> to consider MacPython/"framework"  python. I have no experience with 
> it.  If there are good reasons for not using it (other than visual 
> python unavailability) I'd appreciate hearing what they are.
> 
> I stopped maintaining my Mac at OS 10.2.6.  Do I understand correctly 
> that OS 10.3 adopts MacPython as the native python?  IIRC,  OS 10.2.x 
> actually had three pythons available, the native one, MacPython and 
> Fink's python.  Ugh.
> 
> In truth, I had my Mac removed while 10.2.6 was current.  It was too 
> much trouble ... impossible in some cases  ... to maintain the python 
> packages I wanted (matplotlib, e.g.).  I understand that 10.3 is easier 
> because the fink packages are being currently maintained for 10.3.    
> But we still have Macs in the labs.  I have not taken on the task of 
> installing visual on them, although I think I will have to by next 
> September when I start teaching M&I.  The installation and maintenance 
> issues were prohibitive. 
> 
> So you see how much easier my task (and that of others) would be to have 
> a simply installed package, and one that does not require the additional 
> complication of  Fink.  Hence the compelling nature of MacEnthon, and my 
> desire to have visual run with it.  I wish I had the skills to do it 
> myself. 
> 
> -gary

It's doable, and mostly just requires a lot of hand-waving in Autoconf's
direction.  First, you would build FSF G++ 3.3.4 and Boost.Python 1.31
with the FSF compiler, and install them into /usr/local.  Building
Boost.Python will require the most work - I still need to do a write-up
on it.  Then configure Visual with:

CXX=/usr/local/bin/g++-3.3.4 CXXFLAGS="-O2 -finline-functions"
CPPFLAGS="-I/sw/include" LDFLAGS="-Wl,-framework,Python"
PYTHON=/usr/bin/python ../visual-3.0.2/configure
--prefix=/System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.3

Note that even going this route, you will still depend on the Gtk+ and
gtkglarea libs from Fink.

Hopefully that will get you pointed in the right direction.

-Jonathan

Side note: The main reason that we do not provide a framework build of
Visual against the Apple-supplied Python 2.3, is that the Apple-supplied
Python does not provide Idle or TkInter.  The second reason is that it
would be a major pain to also build and ship a complete set of gtk+
libs, independent of the Fink project.

Re: [Visualpython-users] MacEnthon

[Jon S. <js...@so...>]

> Side note: The main reason that we do not provide a framework build of
> Visual against the Apple-supplied Python 2.3, is that the 
> Apple-supplied
> Python does not provide Idle or TkInter.  The second reason is that it
> would be a major pain to also build and ship a complete set of gtk+
> libs, independent of the Fink project.

However, a framework of this sort (including gtk+ libs, would  be most 
welcome, since it is a major pain for most mac users to work in 
fink/x11.  TkInter is available.  Moreover there is now a working QT on 
the mac along with an  Eric3 editor that looks quite excellent.    
http://www.die-offenbachs.de/detlev/eric3.html

It would be very nice to have a font-smoothing, first class mac IDE for 
python and vpython work on the mac and to not have to worry about 
multiple pythons.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jon Schull, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Information Technology
Rochester Institute of Technology
102 Lomb Memorial Drive
Rochester, New York 14623
sc...@di... 585-738-6696