[Distutils] 400 Client Error: Binary wheel for an unsupported platform

David Cournapeau cournape at gmail.com
Thu Jul 9 18:52:06 CEST 2015

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 23:50:30 +1000
> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > As Donald notes, I think we're now in a good position to start making
> > progress here, but the first step is going to be finding a way to
> > ensure that *by default*, pip on Linux ignores wheel files published
> > on PyPI, and requires that they be *whitelisted* in some fashion
> > (whether individually or categorically). That way, we know we're not
> > going to make the default user experience on Linux *worse* than the
> > status quo while we're still experimenting with how we want the
> > publication side of things to work. Debugging build time API
> > compatibility errors can be hard enough, debugging runtime A*B*I
> > compatibility errors is a nightmare even for seasoned support
> > engineers.
> By the way, I think there's another possibility if the Python packaging
> authority doesn't want to tackle this (admittedly delicate) problem:
> issue a public statement that Anaconda is the preferred way of
> installing Linux binary packages if they aren't provided (or the
> version is too old) by their Linux distribution of choice.
> It would then give more authority to software developers if they want
> to tell their users "don't use pip to install our code under Linux, use
> conda".
I don't think it is reasonable for pypa to recommend one solution when
multiple are available (though it is certainly fair to mention them).

ActiveState, Enthought (my own employer) also provide linux binaries,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20150709/6ceaed69/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list