[Distutils] pypi and easy_install
billiejoex at gmail.com
Sat Jan 19 20:10:22 CET 2008
Just another thing.
I was wondering what do you think would be better to do as default.
Using Python modules as default and spawn() as fall back or doing the contrary?
Maybe using spawn() as default would be better since original
utilities should be faster than python modules.
2008/1/19, Giampaolo Rodola' <billiejoex at gmail.com>:
> Ok then. I'll work on it as soon as possible and open a ticket on the
> bug tracker.
> 2008/1/19, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com>:
> > At 04:44 AM 1/19/2008 +0100, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote:
> > >Ok, I tried to implement this and it is seems I made it.
> > >The change permit to use the distutils "--formats=tar,gztar,bztar"
> > >option without need of having tar/gzip/bzip2 utilities installed on
> > >the system.
> > >Don't know if distutils test suite includes tests for the part of code
> > >I modified but Lib/test/test_distutils.py run successfully on Python
> > >2.5.1.
> > >
> > >The only compression format currently left out is ztar.
> > >I may be wrong but I haven't seen modules able to work with that
> > >format in the Python stdlib.
> > >
> > >I'll wait for your review.
> > >Tell me if you want me to open a ticket on the Python bug tracker to
> > >let also other users review the patch, modify something or throw the
> > >whole thing away. :-)
> > That would probably be a good idea. In the meantime, my only comment
> > is that for consistency with make_zipfile, the code should work even
> > if gzip, tarfile, or bz2 aren't importable. That is, falling back to
> > the old spawn-based methods if the relevant library or libraries are
> > not available. The comment at the top, after all, says "This module
> > should be kept compatible with Python 2.1," and the tarfile and bz2
> > modules weren't added until 2.3. (I'm not sure when gzip was added.)
More information about the Distutils-SIG