Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
On 09/25/2013 12:20 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > > On 09/24/2013 12:11 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> Hi Monty, >> >> On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >>> Instead of: >>> >>> "python setup.py install" >>> >>> Run: >>> >>> "pip install ." >> >> No way that this happens on the packaging side. Buildd have no network >> access (on purpose), and we must not do any network access when building. >> >> So I wonder what this post is trying to achieve. > > This post has nothing to do with packaging. The OpenStack project does > not produce packages. > > This is informational for people who are already running setup.py > install, suggesting that they use pip install . instead. > > If, however, you are in a packaging situation and you are running > setup.py install as part of your packaging scripts such as in your > debian/rules file or your rpm spec file, continuing to use setup.py > install should have no negative effects, as all of the requirements > processing should be avoided due to the system packaging having taken > care of it already, so the evil that is easy_install will not be invoked. > > Further, all debian/rules and rpm spec files that are packaging > openstack project should really add the SKIP_PIP_INSTALL env var. This > will turn off the additional pip operations that pbr does - which are > again pointless in a distro-packaging world. Hi, Thanks for this clarification. You got me scared!!! :) BTW, as I wrote already, I'm not really a fan of adding SKIP_PIP_INSTALL, because if I do, I might not see the errors due to missing dependencies. If there's a missing dependency and pip tries to install it, it will break the build process, which really is what I want. Or is it that SKIP_PIP_INSTALL still does a check to see if dependencies are there? If that's not the case, then I would find it really nice if it was possible to have a mode in which there is a pip check that does a *hard break* error, and just stops the build process (no need to wait until dpkg-buildpackage sees that there's an egg-info folder that shouldn't be there). Any thoughts on this? Thomas ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
On 09/24/2013 12:11 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi Monty, > > On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> Instead of: >> >> "python setup.py install" >> >> Run: >> >> "pip install ." > > No way that this happens on the packaging side. Buildd have no network > access (on purpose), and we must not do any network access when building. > > So I wonder what this post is trying to achieve. This post has nothing to do with packaging. The OpenStack project does not produce packages. This is informational for people who are already running setup.py install, suggesting that they use pip install . instead. If, however, you are in a packaging situation and you are running setup.py install as part of your packaging scripts such as in your debian/rules file or your rpm spec file, continuing to use setup.py install should have no negative effects, as all of the requirements processing should be avoided due to the system packaging having taken care of it already, so the evil that is easy_install will not be invoked. Further, all debian/rules and rpm spec files that are packaging openstack project should really add the SKIP_PIP_INSTALL env var. This will turn off the additional pip operations that pbr does - which are again pointless in a distro-packaging world. > On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> It is common practice in python to run: >> >> python setup.py install >> or >> python setup.py develop >> >> So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that >> those always work. > > Please continue to spend "a giant amount of effort" to make sure that > python setup.py install works (I won't care about develop), as this is > what is being used by debhelper by default. It will. > On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: >> It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some >> places where setup.py install directly can fail. > > If "setup.py install" fails, this is a bug and it shall be fixed. :) Not to beat a dead horse - but the things I am talking about here have to do with dependency resolution, not with actual installation. Monty ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
My plague is feeling much better now, thanks. Keeping using pip! Anita. On 09/23/2013 09:43 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: I wonder who got the plague if u got the food :-/ Sent from my really tiny device... On Sep 23, 2013, at 8:07 PM, "Michael Basnight" wrote: But I got suddenly full. Interesting thing that is. Sent from my digital shackles On Sep 23, 2013, at 7:16 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: I ran that but world peace didn't happen. Where can I get my refund? Sent from my really tiny device... On Sep 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, "Monty Taylor" wrote: tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip It is common practice in python to run: python setup.py install or python setup.py develop So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that those always work. Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to suggest: Instead of: "python setup.py install" Run: "pip install ." It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places where setup.py install directly can fail. Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: "pip install -e ." Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. Things this will help with: - world peace - requirements processing - global hunger - the plague Enjoy. Monty PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it doesn't it's less my fault. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
Hi Monty, On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > Instead of: > > "python setup.py install" > > Run: > > "pip install ." No way that this happens on the packaging side. Buildd have no network access (on purpose), and we must not do any network access when building. So I wonder what this post is trying to achieve. On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > It is common practice in python to run: > > python setup.py install > or > python setup.py develop > > So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that > those always work. Please continue to spend "a giant amount of effort" to make sure that python setup.py install works (I won't care about develop), as this is what is being used by debhelper by default. On 09/24/2013 09:44 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some > places where setup.py install directly can fail. If "setup.py install" fails, this is a bug and it shall be fixed. :) Cheers, Thomas ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
I wonder who got the plague if u got the food :-/ Sent from my really tiny device... On Sep 23, 2013, at 8:07 PM, "Michael Basnight" wrote: > But I got suddenly full. Interesting thing that is. > > Sent from my digital shackles > >> On Sep 23, 2013, at 7:16 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: >> >> I ran that but world peace didn't happen. >> >> Where can I get my refund? >> >> Sent from my really tiny device... >> >>> On Sep 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, "Monty Taylor" wrote: >>> >>> tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip >>> >>> It is common practice in python to run: >>> >>> python setup.py install >>> or >>> python setup.py develop >>> >>> So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that >>> those always work. >>> >>> Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a >>> pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a >>> bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to >>> suggest: >>> >>> Instead of: >>> >>> "python setup.py install" >>> >>> Run: >>> >>> "pip install ." >>> >>> It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places >>> where setup.py install directly can fail. >>> >>> Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: >>> >>> "pip install -e ." >>> >>> Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. >>> >>> Things this will help with: >>> - world peace >>> - requirements processing >>> - global hunger >>> - the plague >>> >>> Enjoy. >>> >>> Monty >>> >>> PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it >>> doesn't it's less my fault. >>> >>> ___ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> ___ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
But I got suddenly full. Interesting thing that is. Sent from my digital shackles > On Sep 23, 2013, at 7:16 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > > I ran that but world peace didn't happen. > > Where can I get my refund? > > Sent from my really tiny device... > >> On Sep 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, "Monty Taylor" wrote: >> >> tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip >> >> It is common practice in python to run: >> >> python setup.py install >> or >> python setup.py develop >> >> So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that >> those always work. >> >> Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a >> pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a >> bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to >> suggest: >> >> Instead of: >> >> "python setup.py install" >> >> Run: >> >> "pip install ." >> >> It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places >> where setup.py install directly can fail. >> >> Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: >> >> "pip install -e ." >> >> Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. >> >> Things this will help with: >> - world peace >> - requirements processing >> - global hunger >> - the plague >> >> Enjoy. >> >> Monty >> >> PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it >> doesn't it's less my fault. >> >> ___ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
I ran that but world peace didn't happen. Where can I get my refund? Sent from my really tiny device... On Sep 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, "Monty Taylor" wrote: > tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip > > It is common practice in python to run: > > python setup.py install > or > python setup.py develop > > So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that > those always work. > > Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a > pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a > bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to > suggest: > > Instead of: > > "python setup.py install" > > Run: > > "pip install ." > > It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places > where setup.py install directly can fail. > > Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: > > "pip install -e ." > > Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. > > Things this will help with: > - world peace > - requirements processing > - global hunger > - the plague > > Enjoy. > > Monty > > PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it > doesn't it's less my fault. > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip > > It is common practice in python to run: > > python setup.py install > or > python setup.py develop > > So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that > those always work. > > Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a > pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a > bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to > suggest: > > Instead of: > > "python setup.py install" > > Run: > > "pip install ." > > It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places > where setup.py install directly can fail. > > Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: > > "pip install -e ." > > Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. > > Things this will help with: > - world peace > - requirements processing > - global hunger > - the plague > > Enjoy. > +1 for you and all your fancy tricks! Thank you! > > Monty > > PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it > doesn't it's less my fault. > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- -Dolph ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] On the usage of pip vs. setup.py install
tl;dr - easy_install sucks, so use pip It is common practice in python to run: python setup.py install or python setup.py develop So much so that we spend a giant amount of effort to make sure that those always work. Fortunately for us, the underlying mechanism, setuptools, can often be a pile of monkies. pip, while also with its fair share of issues, _is_ a bit better at navigating the shallow waters at times. SO - I'd like to suggest: Instead of: "python setup.py install" Run: "pip install ." It should have the exact same result, but pip can succeed in some places where setup.py install directly can fail. Also, if you'd like to run python setup.py develop, simply run: "pip install -e ." Which you may not have known will run setup.py develop behind the scenes. Things this will help with: - world peace - requirements processing - global hunger - the plague Enjoy. Monty PS. The other should work. It's just sometimes it doesn't, and when it doesn't it's less my fault. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
