Message250256
| Author |
cgohlke |
| Recipients |
cgohlke, larry, paul.moore, skrah, steve.dower, tim.golden, zach.ware |
| Date |
2015-09-08.20:53:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1441745638.79.0.130567934401.issue25027@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
|
| Content |
I understand that distributing dependent DLLs next to extension modules is considered the best approach <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2014-October/024990.html> (which nevertheless fails in common cases), however vcruntime140.dll is a special case since it will be shared by almost all extension modules and can be considered a system library.
My Python 3.4 installation contains 913 .pyd files in 277 directories under Lib\site-packages. With the proposed change there will be ~277 redundant vcruntime140.dll files under Python 3.5. Size is not an issue since vcruntime140.dll is small (~87 KB for 64 bit).
Many extension modules are installed directly into Lib\site-packages (no package directory). Uninstalling any one of those extension modules using pip or "wininstaller" will delete vcruntime140.dll from Lib\site-packages, potentially breaking the other extension modules in Lib\site-packages.
IANAL, but under GPL "you may not distribute these [runtime] libraries in compiled DLL form with the program" <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WindowsRuntimeAndGPL>. |
|