On Jul 8, 2007, at 12:56 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 07:17 AM 7/8/2007 -0400, Jim Fulton wrote:
So, the Ubuntu packager for setuptools decided not to install setuptools as an actual egg, but as a wonky sort-of develop egg with a less than ideal location.
IMO, this is just wrong and broken. Does anyone disagree?
Yes, because it's fine for them to install it as a develop egg; that's how system packages are *supposed* to be installed.
Really? Why? If this is true, then "develop" seems to be a misnomer.
In other words, it's not wonky, unless they also changed something besides just installing it .egg-info style.
Thus, if buildout is assuming that "DEVELOP_DIST" egg paths contain only modules or packages that are part of that egg, it is broken.
Note, for example, that as of Python 2.5, the distutils install *all* packages with an .egg-info file, which is detected by pkg_resources as a DEVELOP_DIST. A plain old Python 2.5 install with stock system packages will be chock full of develop-style eggs, in other words, even if the packages in question didn't use setuptools at all.
This is by design.
If you want to be able to figure out if something is really a "develop" installation, you need to look for an .egg-link file, not the mere existence of a DEVELOP_DIST egg. Only the "develop" command writes .egg-link files.
But you can't look for an egg-link file if all you have is a distribution. The dist location points to the contents of the egg link file. How is one to determine, given a DEVELOP_DIS egg in an environment whether it was created by the develop command? Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@zope.com Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org