On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> So the question is, how do we get a .egg-info? For the specific case > >> Ralf ran into, I'm pretty sure the solution is just that if you're > >> clever enough to do an in-place build and add it to your PYTHONPATH, > >> you should be clever enough to also run 'python setupegg.py egg_info' > >> which will create a .egg-info to go with your in-place build and > >> everything will be fine. > > > > That command first starts rebuilding numpy. > > No, it just seems to run the config and source-generation bits, not > build anything. It also leaves the .egg-info in the source directory, > which is what you want. > You're right, sorry. I saw output like "building extension "numpy.core._dotblas" sources" scrolling by and hit Ctrl-C. > > > >> P.S.: yeah the thing where pip decides to upgrade the world is REALLY > >> OBNOXIOUS. It also appears to be on the list to be fixed in the next > >> release or the next release+1, so I guess there's hope?: > >> https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/571 > > > > Good to know. Let's hope that does make it in. Given it's development > model, > > I'm less optimistic that easy_install will receive the same fix though > .... > > Yeah, easy_install is abandoned and bit-rotting, which is why people > usually recommend pip :-). But in this case, I thought that > easy_install already doesn't upgrade the world when it runs? Is there > something to fix here? > It does, as Josef said above. It has the same -U and --no-deps flags. > > Until both pip and easy_install are fixed, this alone should be enough > for > > the advice to be "don't use install_requires". It's not like my > alternative > > suggestion takes away any information or valuable functionality. > > pandas, for example, requires several other packages, and I found it > quite convenient the other day when I wanted to try out a new version > and pip automatically took care of setting all that up for me. It even > correctly upgraded numpy, since the virtualenv I was using for testing > had inherited my system-installed 1.5.2, but this was the first > version of pandas that needed 1.6. > So this saved you from reading "pandas requires numpy >= 1.6.1" and typing "pip install -U numpy". Not my definition of valuable functionality, and certainly not worth the risk of upgrading numpy silently for users. Python packaging tools make me feel grumpy and traumatized too but I > don't see how the solution is to just give up on computer-readable > dependency-tracking altogether. > Proper dependency tracking would be preferable, but none at all is better than the current situation imho. Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
