In article <rowen-11D147.15580001072010@...1803...>,
My binaries are presently named:
matplotlib-0.99.3-py2.5-macosx10.4-2010-06-30.dmg
matplotlib-0.99.3-py2.6-macosx10.4-2010-06-30.dmg
The easy thing is to simply remove the date; the name then matches the
scheme used by numpy and scipy so it will probably be clear to most
users.
I guess I'm blind. Here is the naming scheme used by numpy and scipy:
scipy-0.7.2-py2.6-python.org.dmg
numpy-1.4.1-py2.6-python.org.dmg
One option is to simply adopt that (replacing python.org with Apple for
your binary). But I really don't like omitting the minimum version of
Mac OS X it works with (not to mention omitting "mac" altogether!), so I
recommend the following, where I moved the python source before the
version of python because otherwise the Apple in
"py2.6-Apple-macosx10.6" might seem to refer to macosx instead of python:
matplotlib-0.99.3-Apple-py2.6-macosx10.6.dmg
for your existing binary, and
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.5-macosx10.4.dmg
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.6-macosx10.4.dmg
for mine.
-- Russell
···
"Russell E. Owen" <rowen@...2756...> wrote:
OK, this is done. Thanks for the builds and naming suggestions. Do
you think we should replace the eggs on the site with your builds and
names as well, and importantly, if so, are you able to build them? My
OSX builds were initially curtailed when my powerbook died. William
Stein and the sage project gave me remote access to one of their OSX
build boxes and that was working for a while but then they upgraded to
10.6 64bit and that broke the build environment again for a while and
I don't have an easy way to configure that machine with the various
builds of python and associated tools that I need. In short, I am not
the best person to do the OSX builds and am wondering if you would be
interested in doing the OSX binaries for upcoming releases. We are
working to get 1.0 out ASAP -- possibly over the weekend or early next
week depending on our efforts to quash a couple of remaining bugs.
Would you be able to do the OSX binary builds for 1.0 too?
Thanks,
JDH
···
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Russell E. Owen <rowen@...2756...> wrote:
matplotlib-0.99.3-Apple-py2.6-macosx10.6.dmg
for your existing binary, and
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.5-macosx10.4.dmg
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.6-macosx10.4.dmg
I would be happy to make the Mac binary builds for matplotlib (at least the ones I know how to make -- for python.org 32-bit).
I personally suggest not building Mac eggs -- at least until easy_install gets really cleaned up. Right now it tends to try to download stuff it has no business downloading and it doesn't check for compatibility. The binary installer is much safer. But if you insist and have easy instructions I will do it.
I suspect I didn't fully answer your question, but I'm not sure what else you want to know so I'll ask you to rephrase any remaining issues.
I'm a bit worried about what will happen when I eventually upgrade my work computer to 10.6 (it's our last remaining 10.5 machine at the moment). But since I have ready access to 10.6 computers I should see if I can do a working build on 10.6 with the binaries I already created on 10.5. (That is likely to work, and may save a lot of trouble -- at least until those versions of libfreetype, etc. get old enough to need upgrading). I don't see myself going to 64-bit for a long time since I have to keep my work machine as compatible as possible.
It is very exciting to hear that matplotlib 1.0 is so close.
Regards,
-- Russell
···
On Jul 2, 2010, at 7:43 AM, John Hunter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Russell E. Owen <rowen@...2756...> wrote:
matplotlib-0.99.3-Apple-py2.6-macosx10.6.dmg
for your existing binary, and
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.5-macosx10.4.dmg
matplotlib-0.99.3-python-py2.6-macosx10.4.dmg
OK, this is done. Thanks for the builds and naming suggestions. Do
you think we should replace the eggs on the site with your builds and
names as well, and importantly, if so, are you able to build them? My
OSX builds were initially curtailed when my powerbook died. William
Stein and the sage project gave me remote access to one of their OSX
build boxes and that was working for a while but then they upgraded to
10.6 64bit and that broke the build environment again for a while and
I don't have an easy way to configure that machine with the various
builds of python and associated tools that I need. In short, I am not
the best person to do the OSX builds and am wondering if you would be
interested in doing the OSX binaries for upcoming releases. We are
working to get 1.0 out ASAP -- possibly over the weekend or early next
week depending on our efforts to quash a couple of remaining bugs.
Would you be able to do the OSX binary builds for 1.0 too?
Thanks,
JDH
I would be happy to make the Mac binary builds for matplotlib (at least the ones I know how to make -- for python.org 32-bit).
I personally suggest not building Mac eggs -- at least until easy_install gets really cleaned up. Right now it tends to try to download stuff it has no business downloading and it doesn't check for compatibility. The binary installer is much safer. But if you insist and have easy instructions I will do it.
I won't insist -- I have personally found eggs are more trouble than
their worth. Others may ask for them, so we can deal with this on as
as needed basis.
I suspect I didn't fully answer your question, but I'm not sure what else you want to know so I'll ask you to rephrase any remaining issues.
You answered my two questions: should we build eggs (no) and will you
do the builds (yes). Perfect.
I'm a bit worried about what will happen when I eventually upgrade my work computer to 10.6 (it's our last remaining 10.5 machine at the moment). But since I have ready access to 10.6 computers I should see if I can do a working build on 10.6 with the binaries I already created on 10.5. (That is likely to work, and may save a lot of trouble -- at least until those versions of libfreetype, etc. get old enough to need upgrading). I don't see myself going to 64-bit for a long time since I have to keep my work machine as compatible as possible.
If need be, perhaps I can do the 10.6 64 bit binaries on the sage
machine. I just need to figure out the apple python vs python.org
python problem on that platform.
It is very exciting to hear that matplotlib 1.0 is so close.
Yep -- long time coming 
Thanks for your help,
JDH
···
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Russell Owen <rowen@...2756...> wrote: