Installing Python in a path that contains a blank

[Konrad Hinsen]

I am trying to install Python from sources in my home directory on a
Mac cluster (running MacOS X 10.4.8). The path to my home directory
contains a blank, and since the installation procedure insists on
getting an absolute path for the prefix, I cannot avoid installing to
a path whose name contains a blank. Python does not seem to be
prepared for this, as it uses only the part before the blank,
resulting in numerous error messages.

Does anyone know a workaround?

Thanks,
Konrad.

[Stargaming]

Konrad Hinsen schrieb:

I am trying to install Python from sources in my home directory on a
Mac cluster (running MacOS X 10.4.8). The path to my home directory
contains a blank, and since the installation procedure insists on
getting an absolute path for the prefix, I cannot avoid installing to a
path whose name contains a blank. Python does not seem to be prepared
for this, as it uses only the part before the blank, resulting in
numerous error messages.

Does anyone know a workaround?

Thanks,
Konrad.

You could give /foo/bar\ baz/ham or "/foo/bar baz/ham" (either escaping
the blanks or wrapping the path in quotation marks) a try. I can't
verify it either, just guess from other terminals' behaviour.

HTH,
Stargaming

[John Machin]

On 21/05/2007 11:30 PM, Konrad Hinsen wrote:

I am trying to install Python from sources in my home directory on a Mac
cluster (running MacOS X 10.4.8). The path to my home directory contains
a blank, and since the installation procedure insists on getting an
absolute path for the prefix, I cannot avoid installing to a path whose
name contains a blank. Python does not seem to be prepared for this, as
it uses only the part before the blank, resulting in numerous error
messages.

Does anyone know a workaround?

On Windows, the workaround for pesky paths (i.e. containing blanks or
just inconveniently long) is the subst command:

command-prompt>subst X: "C:\Documen ts and Settings"

Thereafter X:\foo can be used wherever "C:\Documen ts and Settings\foo"
would otherwise be required.

Is there not a similar trick on MacOS X?

HTH,
John

[Greg Donald]

On 5/21/07, John Machin <sj******@lexic on.netwrote:

Is there not a similar trick on MacOS X?

It's called a symlink:

ln -s /Users/gdonald /foo

--
Greg Donald
http://destiney.com/

[Konrad Hinsen]

On 21.05.2007, at 21:11, Stargaming wrote:

You could give /foo/bar\ baz/ham or "/foo/bar baz/ham" (either
escaping
the blanks or wrapping the path in quotation marks) a try. I can't
verify it either, just guess from other terminals' behaviour.

I tried both already, but neither one works. If I use a backslash, it
doesn't end up in the Makefile, and if I use quotes, I get lots of
error messages that I don't really want to analyze.

Thanks for your reply anyway!

Konrad.

[Konrad Hinsen]

On 22.05.2007, at 00:34, Greg Donald wrote:

On 5/21/07, John Machin <sj******@lexic on.netwrote:

>Is there not a similar trick on MacOS X?

It's called a symlink:

ln -s /Users/gdonald /foo

Right, but since I have no write permissions anywhere except in my
home directory (whose path already has the blank), links won't help me.

Konrad.

[Neil Cerutti]

On 2007-05-22, Konrad Hinsen <ko***********@ laposte.netwrot e:

On 21.05.2007, at 21:11, Stargaming wrote:

>You could give /foo/bar\ baz/ham or "/foo/bar baz/ham" (either
escaping
the blanks or wrapping the path in quotation marks) a try. I can't
verify it either, just guess from other terminals' behaviour.

I tried both already, but neither one works. If I use a
backslash, it doesn't end up in the Makefile, and if I use
quotes, I get lots of error messages that I don't really want
to analyze.

Try adding *more* backslashes. Sometimes, it's the only way. ;)

--
Neil Cerutti
There are two ways to argue with a woman, and neither of them work. --Carlos
Boozer