Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to install Scipy for Python3.3 in Windows. But I only found Scipy installation file for Python up to the version 3.2 in the following link:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/scipy/files/scipy/0.12.0b1/
So is it still not available at this time? Any suggestions?
I highly recommend getting all of the components of Scipy-stack, which is just below the scipy files linked in the comment above. Unfortunately the maintainer hasn't updated scipy-stack to 3.3 yet (I emailed him about it), but all of the components (numpy-MKL, scipy, matplotlib, ipython, pandas, sympy, and nose), as well as all the dependencies (Python-dateutil, distribute, gmpy, PIL, pygments, pyreadline, pytz, statsmodels, and tornado) have 3.3 versions available for both Win32 and AMD64. Depending on what sort of computing you'll be doing, these packages will give you a great start, and as they're all from the same source they should all work well together.
UPDATE
I just heard from Christoph Gohlke, and he is holding off on updating scipy-stack until numpy-1.7.1, scipy-0.12, and ipython-0.13.2 are released, so probably a few months. If you want to build your own version, his redist_wininst.py script lets you do just that.
UPDATE 2
scipy-stack has been updated with new versions of its components, for both Python 2.7 and 3.3. Enjoy!
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I've recently upgraded my MacOS to Big Sur. When I try to install Python packages using pip no wheel is found and everything is forced to be built from source resulting in very slow installation and, worst, many installation errors because of limitations of the build environment. Check for instance https://pypi.org/simple/numpy/. Given that I'm using Python 3.8, the closest available wheel is numpy-1.19.4-cp38-cp38-macosx_10_9_x86_64.whl. I would like to force pip using these wheels for macosx_10_9 and see what happens. Do you know of any way to achieve that?
I'm answering to myself with a workaround to force the platform, for example for numpy:
pip install --platform macosx_10_9_x86_64 --only-binary=:all: --target=/usr/local/lib/python3.8/site-packages numpy
Sadly the --target option is necessary although there are plans to remove this requirement (https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/5453).
I've requested that pip takes macosx_10_9 as valid for Big Sur in https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/9138, but I guess the probability that this proposal will be rejected is high.
I don't know how long it takes for new wheels to be built for a new platform, but I assume the workaround is good enough in the meantime.
A second, dirtier but more convenient hack is to override version_str:
version_str, _, cpu_arch = platform.mac_ver() # type: ignore
version_str = "10.15.1"
in site-packages/pip/_vendor/packaging/tags.py
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I am deciding whether to install python 3.4 or 2.7 on my home server running Ubuntu Server 14.04.2. I want to ensure that it has support from all the most used python libraries (scipy, numpy, requests, etc) but I am not sure how many of these packages fully support 3.4.
Do all 2.7 packages work on 3.4? If no, what are the differences between the two that causes this errors?
No, only packages specifically written to support both Python 2 and 3 will run on either.
It is possible to write polyglot Python, but this requires effort from the library author. Code written for Python 2.7 will not automatically work on Python 3.
Minor versions of python are mostly backwards compatible, however major versions do not maintain backwards compatibility. There are many libraries that work with both, but the language itself does not make that guarantee.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Each Python distribution I found contains a lot of libs I don't need (numpy, scipy, PyQt etc.) I am looking for portable CPython analogue that doesn't require installation, doesn't touch anything but its directory, and is small to download over a slow or metered Internet connection.
I don't mean specifically http://portablepython.com/. I can choose packages to unpack manually. There is no way to make installer silent.
There is https://winpython.github.io/. I have to unpack 1.5GB first and uninstall unused packages.
PyPy -- http://pypy.org/. As far as I understand, is portable too but it seems it don't support all packages I need. (I will investigate that later.)
Why I need that.
Project is required to be copy-deployed on Windows machines with no prerequisites. Second, building project directory with Python interpreter and packages (including mine) must be completely automated and should use project's repository and files that can be easily downloaded from Internet.
suggestion:
install a winpython,
remove all packages you don't want,
add all packages you want,
zip the result, and unzip it on any PCs.
There is Portable Python. But as you said, it comes with some extra (and very useful) libs. What's wrong with this extra libs? I mean, if you will not use, just leave there.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
What are the possibilities to upgrade my existing Python installation (in my case from version 3.2.2 to 3.3.0) on my Windows 7 x64 system and not having to re-install all my packages? Is there a convenient/automated solution to do this?
I'd like to end up with only one Python version on my system.
The problem is chiefly with packages written in C: they will be linked with the 3.2 Python code. It might just be a question of re-linking them, but I have had issues with popular packages like numpy (I currenty can't get that to compile on 3.3).
The pure Python packages would probably be OK in theory, but honestly, is it worth taking the risk?
It is safer to load the 3.3 versions of the packages, every time. Stick with 3.2 until you can upgrade everything. You can have more than one version of Python loaded on Windows, I have 2.6, 2.7, 3.2 and 3.3 co-existing. You just have to be careful with %PATH%, assoc, and ftype.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 8 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Improve this question
The latest matplotlib download page only shows OS X 10.3 download options for mac. Wikipedia claims OS X 10.3 is Power PC only. It seems strange to me that there is no option for downloading matplotlib for Intel based macs. Is this correct?
Matplotlib installation is a tricky beast and althought I have it installed in my python2.6 environment I cannot replicated that success (yet) under a new python2.7 (using virtualenv). So Far:
using the "10.3" dmg as suggested above appeared to install properly but throws an unknown architecture error when trying to plot.
using easy_install fails for me on an unknow architechure error during the freetype2 part of the install.
Downloading the tarball and compiling from source throws the same error. I will eventually tweek the config settings to get MY install to work but I'm not sure that that will help anyone else (sorry Dejas).
Freetype2 and libpng are common culprits for install problems. You could try to google your way through others efforts. Having installed it on a number of osx systems, tarball source install seems to be the most reliable route. If you are not up on what easy_install is (from your question) then you might want to seriously consider one of the Enthougth Python installs.
Update: One machine allowed the source and/or easy_install. I finally just rsync'ed my way to a working condition on my second machine.
Have you tried: easy_install matplotlib
Ok, found an Intel mac. Seems to work. No complaints from the installer at least.