Re: [Distutils] Draft of new setuptools installation instructions
At 02:40 PM 10/3/2006 -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to just tell them to do "sh ./setuptools-0.6c4-py2.4.egg" instead of marking it executable first?
I found the phrasing much more awkward that way, as it led to having to explain the idea that it's got a shell script in there. It seemed easier to just dodge the issue. But if you can come up with a phrasing that works, go for it.
On 10/3/06, Phillip J. Eby pje@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 02:40 PM 10/3/2006 -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to just tell them to do "sh ./setuptools-0.6c4-py2.4.egg" instead of marking it executable first?
I found the phrasing much more awkward that way, as it led to having to explain the idea that it's got a shell script in there. It seemed easier to just dodge the issue. But if you can come up with a phrasing that works, go for it.
Does it really require explanation?
2) Run it as a shell script (e.g. ``sh ./setuptools-0.6c4-py2.4.egg``). Setuptools will install itself using the matching version of Python (e.g. ``python2.4``), and will place the ``easy_install`` executable in the default location for installing Python scripts.
-bob
participants (2)
-
Bob Ippolito -
Phillip J. Eby