[Info-vax] Python for x86?

[Craig A. Berry]

On 4/11/23 8:23 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-04-08, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at avanthar.avanthar.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the confirmation.  I thought that was the case, but wasn't sure
>> if I was simply looking in the wrong place.  These days Python is pretty
>> much a requirement.  Even IBM z/OS supports Python 3 now.
>>
> 
> And for very good reason. Python is an excellent scripting language
> that is suitable for a _wide_ range of scripting tasks.
> 
> In fact, if VSI had to choose one only, I would have said that Python,
> instead of Perl, should have been the one that's part of the base
> installation. (Although it would be better to have both of them as
> part of the base installation.)

I don't think there was any such choice and I agree that having a Python
package available is essential.  I'm not sure why Python isn't available
yet.  The native C and C++ compilers are still in field test state and
have long lists of known issues, so it's possible the dependencies just
aren't there quite yet to build CPython.

Perl is available because I built it with the cross tools kit and VSI
repackaged and signed it with my blessing.  That means, among other
things, that you can't build Perl extensions with the native compilers
until Perl itself is built with them.  Building Perl with the native
compilers is well under way but not quite there yet.  Perl and its test
suite have a way of revealing bugs in the C compiler, the CRTL, and even
the OS itself occasionally.