[Distutils] Distutils has no module named util, or is it a package problem?

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Fri Nov 11 00:05:44 CET 2005

At 04:23 PM 11/10/2005 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:

>The sandbox in this case is when setuptools runs setup.py with fake file 
>routines, to see if the setup.py file writes things to weird 
>locations.  Now that I think about it, this isn't for zip-safe testing, 
>but to test if setuptools can properly wrap this.
>I can understand why to do this when running a distutils setup.py file, 
>but could this be surpressed for a setup.py file which imports from 
>setuptools?  I think it should be presumed that it is safe in that case.

This is a red herring.  Just because a package uses setuptools, doesn't 
mean it's safe.  The author might have simply taken an older script and 
changed it to import setuptools.  That doesn't fix any issues like custom 
data installation commands, or code in the body of setup.py does any 

So, it doesn't make any sense to scan setup.py for setuptools and then run 
it without sandboxing, and in any case I doubt the sandbox has anything to 
do with this problem.

A simple test should suffice: change the setuptools.sandbox to replace the 
DirectorySandbox().run() call with a straight execfile.  If the problem 
remains, then it's not the sandboxing that's the problem.

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list