On 10/12/2010 09:59 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Giampaolo Rodolà wrote:
If that's the case what would I type in the command prompt in order to
install a module?
"C:\PythonXX\pysetup.exe"?
If so I would strongly miss old "setup.py install".
Another thing bothers me about this. With the current scheme,
if you have multiple Pythons available, it's easy to be sure
that you're installing into the right one, because it's the
one that you use to run setup.py. Whereas if installation is
performed by a different executable, there's a possibility
of them being out of sync.
So I think I'd prefer some scheme involving 'python -m ...'
or some other option to Python itself, rather than a separate
executable.
This is why I suggested that 'setup.sh' (or whatever) take a --python-version
option to select the python executable to use.
Whatever solution is implemented definitely needs to take the
multiple-installed pythons into account.
On Ubuntu, I use python, python2.7, python3.1, python3.2 and that is what I
type to use that particular version. The -m option seems to me to be the
easiest to do and works with all of these.
python2.7 -m setup
python3.2 -m setup
I don't see why that isn't an acceptable solution to this? <shrug>
It's not any different than doing ...
python3.2 -m test.regrtest
python3.2 -m pydoc -g
python3.2 -m idlelib.idle
python3.2 -m this
python3.2 -m turtle
python3.2 -m timeit -h
python3.2 -m trace --help
python3.2 -m dis filename.py
python3.2 -m zipfile
There are probably others I don't remember or know about.
The point is, without the handy '-m', you have to know where the file is,
or set environment variables, or create .bat and/or .sh files, and those
takes a lot more work. So why not just embrace it and move on?
Ron
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
