Hello,
I'm experimenting with package development on different versions of
Python in different virtualenvs. After running "make" I don't do "make
install", but rather I set up virtualenvs by running
/path/to/source/python -m venv env_dir. This works for as long as I
don't need to compile extensions. Once I do that I'm running into
trouble because there is no python3-config binary in the venv, so it
uses the "system" python3-config which of course returns results for the
/usr(/local)/.... tree.
This seems to go against the idea of an encapsulated and self-contained
environment. And the venv created straight from the "not-installed"
source tree works so well that having a venv/bin/python3-config whose
output points into the source tree seems a logical step. Is this an
omission or is there a rationale for not doing it?
Of course I can "properly" install different Python versions by using
different "configure --prefix" directories. But I like the venv so much
in general that this rubs me the wrong way.
Thanks!
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/KMG3USMQLQNI6AEX6UUS2WTNFIIIS2XY/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
