[Python-Dev] Distutils2 scripts
rrr at ronadam.com
Thu Oct 21 03:01:56 CEST 2010
On 10/12/2010 09:59 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:24 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
>> Giampaolo Rodolà wrote:
>>> If that's the case what would I type in the command prompt in order to
>>> install a module?
>>> If so I would strongly miss old "setup.py install".
>> Another thing bothers me about this. With the current scheme,
>> if you have multiple Pythons available, it's easy to be sure
>> that you're installing into the right one, because it's the
>> one that you use to run setup.py. Whereas if installation is
>> performed by a different executable, there's a possibility
>> of them being out of sync.
>> So I think I'd prefer some scheme involving 'python -m ...'
>> or some other option to Python itself, rather than a separate
> This is why I suggested that 'setup.sh' (or whatever) take a --python-version
> option to select the python executable to use.
> Whatever solution is implemented definitely needs to take the
> multiple-installed pythons into account.
On Ubuntu, I use python, python2.7, python3.1, python3.2 and that is what I
type to use that particular version. The -m option seems to me to be the
easiest to do and works with all of these.
python2.7 -m setup
python3.2 -m setup
I don't see why that isn't an acceptable solution to this? <shrug>
It's not any different than doing ...
python3.2 -m test.regrtest
python3.2 -m pydoc -g
python3.2 -m idlelib.idle
python3.2 -m this
python3.2 -m turtle
python3.2 -m timeit -h
python3.2 -m trace --help
python3.2 -m dis filename.py
python3.2 -m zipfile
There are probably others I don't remember or know about.
The point is, without the handy '-m', you have to know where the file is,
or set environment variables, or create .bat and/or .sh files, and those
takes a lot more work. So why not just embrace it and move on?
More information about the Python-Dev