> after looking at the lxml downloads, I noticed that
> python 2.6 downloads are called fat, I assume that
> mean multi arch
I don't know about binary packages of lxml downloads.
The site-packages bundled with Inkscape 0.47 (and 0.48pre1) have separate folder hierarchies for ppc/i386.
The i386 modules for python 2.6 are not universal builds:
> after looking at the lxml downloads, I noticed that
> python 2.6 downloads are called fat, I assume that
> mean multi arch
I don't know about binary packages of lxml downloads.
The site-packages bundled with Inkscape 0.47 (and 0.48pre1) have separate folder hierarchies for ppc/i386.
The i386 modules for python 2.6 are not universal builds:
LeWitt:i386 suv$ file 2.6/*/*.so objectify. so: Mach-O bundle i386
2.6/lxml/etree.so: Mach-O bundle i386
2.6/lxml/
LeWitt:i386 suv$ file 2.6/*/*/*.so core/_dotblas. so: Mach-O bundle i386 core/_sort. so: Mach-O bundle i386 core/multiarray .so: Mach-O bundle i386 core/scalarmath .so: Mach-O bundle i386 core/umath. so: Mach-O bundle i386 fft/fftpack_ lite.so: Mach-O bundle i386 lib/_compiled_ base.so: Mach-O bundle i386 linalg/ lapack_ lite.so: Mach-O bundle i386 numarray/ _capi.so: Mach-O bundle i386 random/ mtrand. so: Mach-O bundle i386
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
2.6/numpy/
The modules for python 2.5 in 'i386' however are Universal builds (PPC, i386), but do not include 64bit (x86-64):
LeWitt:i386 suv$ file 2.5/*/*.so objectify. so: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures objectify. so (for architecture i386): Mach-O bundle i386 objectify. so (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O bundle ppc pyclasslookup. so: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures pyclasslookup. so (for architecture i386): Mach-O bundle i386 pyclasslookup. so (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O bundle ppc
2.5/lxml/etree.so: Mach-O universal binary with 2 architectures
2.5/lxml/etree.so (for architecture i386): Mach-O bundle i386
2.5/lxml/etree.so (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O bundle ppc
2.5/lxml/
2.5/lxml/
2.5/lxml/
2.5/lxml/
2.5/lxml/
2.5/lxml/
(...)
> is it possible the 2.6 lxml in the build is actually the 2.5 lxml
No, they do work with MacPorts Python 2.6 (e.g. on Leopard), if DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH is set.