Mailman 3 November 2007 - Distutils-SIG

Package versioning
by Timothy Docker 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

Hi all, I've been aware that the distutils sig has been simmerring away, but until recently it has not been directly relevant to what I do. I like the look of the proposed api, but have one question. Will this support an installed system that has multiple versions of the same package installed simultaneously? If not, then this would seem to be a significant limitation, especially when dependencies between packages are considered. Assuming it does, then how will this be achieved? I am presently managing this with a messy arrangement of symlinks. A package is installed with its version number in it's name, and a separate directory is created for an application with links from the unversioned package name to the versioned one. Then I just set the pythonpath to this directory. A sample of what the directory looks like is shown below. I'm sure there is a better solution that this, and I'm not sure that this would work under windows anyway (does windows have symlinks?). So, has this SIG considered such versioning issues yet? Cheers, Tim -------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Docker timd(a)macquarie.com.au Quantative Applications Division Macquarie Bank -------------------------------------------------------------- qad16:qad $ ls -l lib/python/ total 110 drwxr-xr-x 2 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:23 1.1 -r--r----- 1 root mts 45172 Sep 1 1998 cdrmodule_0_7_1.so drwxr-xr-x 2 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 chart_1_1 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 Fnorb_0_7_1 dr-xr-x--- 3 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:21 Fnorb_0_8 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 1536 Mar 3 12:45 mts_1_1 dr-xr-x--- 7 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:22 OpenGL_1_5_1 dr-xr-x--- 2 mts mts 1024 Nov 11 11:23 PIL_0_3 drwxr-xr-x 3 mts mts 512 Sep 1 1998 Pmw_0_7 dr-xr-x--- 2 mts mts 512 Nov 11 11:21 v3d_1_1 qad16:qad $ ls -l lib/python/1.1 total 30 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 29 Apr 10 10:43 _glumodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_glumodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 30 Apr 10 10:43 _glutmodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_glutmodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 22 Apr 10 10:43 _imaging.so -> ../PIL_0_3/_imaging.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 36 Apr 10 10:43 _opengl_nummodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_opengl_nummodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 27 Apr 10 10:43 _tkinter.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/_tkinter.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 21 Apr 10 10:43 cdrmodule.so -> ../cdrmodule_0_7_1.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 12 Apr 10 10:43 chart -> ../chart_1_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 12 Apr 10 10:43 Fnorb -> ../Fnorb_0_8 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 12 Apr 10 10:43 mts -> ../mts_1_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 15 Apr 10 10:43 OpenGL -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 33 Apr 10 10:43 opengltrmodule.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/opengltrmodule.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 33 Apr 10 10:43 openglutil_num.so -> ../OpenGL_1_5_1/openglutil_num.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 10 Apr 10 10:43 PIL -> ../PIL_0_3 lrwxrwxrwx 1 mts mts 10 Apr 10 10:43 Pmw -> ../Pmw_0_7 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root other 10 Apr 10 10:43 v3d -> ../v3d_1_1

3 2

[Distutils-sig] distutils charter and interscript
by John Skaller 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

3 2

eggs and Python Unicode variants (UCS2, UCS4)
by Martijn Faassen 29 May '09

29 May '09

Hi there, In the lxml project (http://codespeak.net/lxml), we've just noticed the following problem with lxml eggs: you can easy_install an egg that won't work for your Python. This is because Python can be compiled with either 2 or 4 bytes unicode as its internal representation. Any egg that contains compiled C code that uses unicode such as lxml will run into trouble: if it's compiled with a 4 bytes unicode Python, it won't work on a 2 bytes unicode Python, and vice versa. This problem is fairly common in Linux. Many distributions such as Ubuntu and Fedora compile their python with 4 bytes unicode internal representation. If you compile a Python interpreter by hand it defaults to 2 bytes unicode, however. Hand-building a Python interpreter is done fairly commonly by Linux sysadmins for various reasons. It would therefore be very nice if it became possible to make eggs for the different unicode compilation options of Python. This configuration dimension is a real world issue for any binary Python module that does anything with unicode text.. In an earlier mail to this list: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2005-October/005222.html M.-A. Lemburg and Phillip Eby had the following discussion: [MAL] >>Please make sure that your eggs catch all possible >>Python binary build dimensions: >> >>* Python version >>* Python Unicode variant (UCS2, UCS4) >>* OS name >>* OS version >>* Platform architecture (e.g. 32-bit vs. 64-bit) [PJE] >As far as I know, all of this except the Unicode variant is captured in >distutils' get_platform(). And if it's not, it should be, since it >affects any other kind of bdist mechanism. I'm not sure whether this means this needs to be escalated from setuptools to the Python interpreter level itself. With this mail, I've done the job escalating this lxml problem to what appears to be the right place, though. :) Thanks, Martijn

5 5

unicode bug in distutils
by Tarek Ziadé 05 Apr '09

05 Apr '09

Hello, I have created a setup.py file for distirbution and I bumped into a small bug when i tried to set my name in the contact field (Tarek Ziadé) Using string (utf8 file): setup( maintainer="Tarek Ziadé" ) leads to: File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/distutils/command/register.py", line 162, in send_metadata auth) File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/distutils/command/register.py", line 257, in post_to_server value = unicode(value).encode("utf-8") UnicodeDecodeError: 'ascii' codec can't decode byte 0xc3 in position 10: ordinal not in range(128) Using unicode: setup( maintainer=u"Tarek Ziadé" ) leads to: File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/distutils/dist.py", line 1094, in write_pkg_file file.write('Author: %s\n' % self.get_contact() ) UnicodeEncodeError: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe9' in position 18: ordinal not in range(128) I would propose a patch for this problem but i don't know what would be the best input (i guess unicode for names) Regards Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/

6 9

Adventures with x64, VS7 and VS8 on Windows
by Mark Hammond 22 Mar '08

22 Mar '08

Hi all, I hope the cross-post is appropriate. I've started playing with getting the pywin32 extensions building under the AMD64 architecture. I started building with Visual Studio 8 (it was what I had handy) and I struck a few issues relating to the compiler version that I thought worth sharing. * In trying to build x64 from a 32bit VS7 (ie, cross-compiling via the PCBuild directory), the python.exe project fails with: pythoncore fatal error LNK1112: module machine type 'X86' conflicts with target machine type 'AMD64' is this a known issue, or am I doing something wrong? * The PCBuild8 project files appear to work without modification (I only tried native compilation here though, not a cross-compile) - however, unlike the PCBuild directory, they place all binaries in a 'PCBuild8/x64' directory. While this means that its possible to build for multiple architectures from the same source tree, it makes life harder for tools like 'distutils' - eg, distutils already knows about the 'PCBuild' directory, but it knows nothing about either PCBuild8 or PCBuild8/x64. A number of other build processes also know to look inside a PCBuild directory (eg, Mozilla), so instead of formalizing PCBuild8, I think we should merge PCBuild8 into PCBuild. This could mean PCBuild/vs7 and PCBuild/vs8 directories with the "project" files, but binaries would still be generated in the 'PCBuild' (or PCBuild/x64) directory. This would mean the same tree isn't capable of hosting 2 builds from different VS compilers, but I think that is reasonable (if it's a problem, just have multiple source directories). I understand that PCBuild8 is not "official", but in the assumption that future versions of Python will use a compiler later than VS7, it makes sense to me to clean this up now - what are others opinions on this? * Re the x64 directory used by the PCBuild8 process. IMO, it makes sense to generate x64 binaries to their own directory - my expectation is that cross-compiling between platforms is a reasonable use-case, and we should support multiple achitectures for the same compiler version. This would mean formalizing the x64 directory in both 'PCBuild' and distutils, and leaving other external build processes to update as they support x64 builds. Does this make sense? Would this fatally break other scripts used for packaging (eg, the MSI framework)? * Wide characters in VS8: PC/pyconfig.h defines PY_UNICODE_TYPE as 'unsigned short', which corresponds with both 'WCHAR' and 'wchar' in previous compiler versions. VS8 defines this as wchar_t, which I'm struggling to find a formal definition for beyond being 2 bytes. My problem is that code which assumes a 'Py_UNICODE *' could be used in place of a 'WCHAR *' now fails. I believe the intent on Windows has always been "PyUNICODE == 'native unicode'" - should PC/pyconfig.h reflect this (ie, should pyconfig.h grow a version specific definition of PyUNICODE as wchar_t)? * Finally, as something from left-field which may well take 12 months or more to pull off - but would there be any interest to moving the Windows build process to a cygwin environment based on the existing autoconf scripts? I know a couple of projects are doing this successfully, including Mozilla, so it has precendent. It does impose a greater burden on people trying to build on Windows, but I'd suggest that in recent times, many people who are likely to want to build Python on Windows are already likely to have a cygwin environment. Simpler mingw builds and nuking MSVC specific build stuff are among the advantages this would bring. It is not worth adding this as "yet another windows build option" - so IMO it is only worth progressing with if it became the "blessed" build process for windows - if there is support for this, I'll work on it as the opportunity presents itself... I'm (obviously) only suggesting we do this on the trunk and am happy to make all agreed changes - but I welcome all suggestions or critisisms of this endeavour... Cheers, Mark

14 66

bdist_wininst and Vista User Account Control (UAC)
by Mark Hammond 10 Mar '08

10 Mar '08

The pywin32 extensions require (well, prefer) administrative access during installation - certain files are copied to the System32 directory and the registry at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE is written to. Also, if I understand correctly, if Python happened to be installed into "\Program Files", admin access would be required to create any files in that directory tree - I'm not sure what permissions the \PythonXX directory are created with, but its not unreasable to assume that some shops might choose to secure that directory similarly to "\Program Files". The simplest way to achieve this for bdist_wininst installations is to include some magic in a "manifest". I've confirmed that once this magic is added, programs created by bdist_wininst get the little "shield" icon overlay and prompt for elevation before starting the executable. A problem here is that not all installations will require admin access - eg, a user who installed Python just for themselves will not need elevation to install an extension. A solution here would be for the installer to *not* be marked as requiring elevation, then sniffing the registry to make an educated guess (eg, HKLM\Software\Python\PythonCore\2.5 existing could indicate admin access is required). If it finds elevation is required, it would spawn another copy of itself with elevation requested, and terminate. This will have a side-effect of meaning the installer never gets the "shield" overlay, meaning the user will not be expecting to be prompted - but that is something we can live with. However, there is a complication here. Any "pure python" packages are not tied to a particular Python version, so the user can choose what installed Python version to use. Hence, in the general case, we can only determine if admin is required after the UI has opened and the user has selected the Python version. Arranging for the new "elevated" child process at this point will be (a) ugly, as the UI will vanish before the child process displays its GUI and (b) would require additional command-line processing logic - ie, passing the target directory to the child process. If we could make the determination *before* the GUI opens, it would appear seamless and would not require special command-line handling (the child process just does everything) So I see a few alternatives, but none are very desirable: * Only make this "admin required" check if a specific version of Python is necessary (ie, the package contains extension modules). This would leave pure-python packages out in the cold. * Live with the ugly UI that would result in performing that check after the Python version has been selected, and add the command-line processing necessary to make this work. * Ignore the issue and try to educate people that they must explicitly use "Run as Administrator" for such packages on Vista. I'm wondering if anyone has any opinions or thoughts on how we should handle this? Cheers, Mark

4 11

Package in both setup_requires and install_requires will not be installed
by Michael Hoffman 19 Jan '08

19 Jan '08

Joshua Boverhof previously reported this in <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2007-March/007436.html>. If you specify a package in setup_requires it will be built in the current directory. But even if it is in install_requires as well, it won't be installed because the requirement is already satisfied at setup time by the package in the build directory. Is there a workaround for this?

2 7

Patch for minor easy_install problem
by Toshio Kuratomi 18 Jan '08

18 Jan '08

It looks like this fix to easy_isntall: ''' 0.6c5 * Fixed .dll files on Cygwin not having executable permisions when an egg is installed unzipped. ''' introduced a minor bug. From 0.6c5 on, installing an egg unzipped makes all the files executable. Attaching a patch that only makes .dll's executable. -Toshio

2 1

easy_install of django sdist tarball omits data files
by Graham Carlyle 28 Dec '07

28 Dec '07

Hi I've been trying to install a sdist tarball of a django svn snapshot using easy_install but some of the packages data files (the admin contrib app templates) aren't being installed. I've looked at the easy_install web page and can't see anything that may help me install these data files. I'm doing this as part of a deployment script that uses easy_install to install a web apps dependencies into a particular directory. Is this a misuse of easy install? django's setup.py doesn't use setuptools and so easy_install seems to be creating an sdist_egg on the fly. I'm working round this by just scripting untarring, & "setup.py install" etc. directly which is ok but it would be simpler if i could just call easy_install for all my apps dependencies. thanks, Graham

5 5

zc.buildout: Build python in buildout
by Christian Zagrodnick 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

Hey, building python with buildout is not very hard (see below). When installing sections buildout apparently uses the built python to get dependencies and compile the C extensions if any. Only the dependencies of the recipes are fetched via the bootstrap python. But with C extensions this is the problem. For instance zc.zodbrecipes depend on ZODB3 which is then compiled with the wrong python. This would not be much of a problem but I then get those errors: ImportError: /tmp/test/eggs/ZODB3-3.8.0b4-py2.4-linux-x86_64.egg/persistent/cPersistence.so: undefined symbol: PyUnicodeUCS4_AsEncodedString Any clue what to do? I suppose the only way is to make the two pythons eat the same .so files? This does the trick of building python: [buildout] python = python [python] recipe = zc.recipe.cmmi url = http://python.org/ftp/python/2.4.4/Python-2.4.4.tar.bz2 executable = ${buildout:directory}/parts/python/bin/python2.4 -- Christian Zagrodnick gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstrasse 29 · 06112 halle/saale www.gocept.com · fon. +49 345 12298894 · fax. +49 345 12298891

4 8