On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:41 AM Thomas Kluyver <thomas@kluyver.me.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020, at 21:50, David Mathog wrote:
./lib/python3.6/site-packages/pip/_vendor/appdirs.py:#!/usr/bin/env python
Python packaging tools like pip generally differentiate between *scripts*, which are installed to be run from the command line, and *modules*, which are imported from other Python code. Files under site-packages are modules. Any special handling for shebangs, execute bits, or Windows .exe wrappers is usually done only for scripts.
It's not unusual to see a shebang in modules - I think some editors put it in whenever you create a new Python file. But it doesn't usually do anything. If you want to run a module directly, the normal way now is with "python -m", which doesn't use the shebang.
So in summary: 1. Invalid shebangs for modules in site-packages "should" be harmless - ignore them and hope for the best. 2. Shebangs for scripts "should" be correct. (They are while still inside a venv, but that shebang has to be corrected when the installation is moved to a normal environment, which my code is doing now.) Scripts usually end up in a "bin" directory on linux. Is that part of the installation standard or could a package put them in an arbitrary path (other than under "site-packages") under the venv's root, for instance in a directory named "scripts"? Fixing the shebangs by processing only "bin" is easy, traversing the entire tree is a bit messier. It would be good not to have to do so if that will never find an invalid shebang. Thanks, David Mathog Thanks,
Thomas -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/HPTRB...