[Distutils] pip vs easy_install vs distutils2

Tarek Ziadé ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Thu Jun 3 10:10:55 CEST 2010

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldoussoren at mac.com> wrote:
> On 3 Jun, 2010, at 9:50, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldoussoren at mac.com> wrote:
>>> On 31 May, 2010, at 19:10, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Lennart Regebro <regebro at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 19:02, Carl Meyer <carl at oddbird.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Nope, pip's used --record on installation for years, and the above has
>>>>>> been true since the moment uninstall landed in pip. There are enough
>>>>>> different ways things can get installed that it's not surprising that
>>>>>> some discussions may have been confused ;-)
>>>>> That may be it. Forcing --record in Python 3.2 would be a step forward then? :-)
>>>> You mean in the current distutils ? Because distutils2 will have the
>>>> PEP 376 implementation,
>>>> where we create a RECORD file for each installed project in its dist-info/
>>> I haven't carefully read the entire discussion, but do you mean that distutils won't follow PEP 376 during installation?
>> If people use the old Distutils, (what I've called the current
>> distutils), and trigger an installation via 'python setup.py install'.
>> It'll use the existing code, so install it the 'old' way.
> I know that distutils in python 2. 6 and 3.1 won't support PEP 376, but why won't distutils conform to PEP 376 in python 2.7 and 3.2?
> The RECORD file from PEP 376 would allow  manually installed package (e.g. "python setup.py install") to be further managed by a PEP 376 compliant install tool.  This should be pretty easy to add if it isn't in already, although 2.7rc1 is awfully close.

Are you thinking about a full implicit switch to PEP 376, or an
optional behavior ?

Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list