Martin v. Löwis added the comment:
David, Mark: I agree that there is no bug in Python or pip here. The
installation *does* complete successfully, and the engine module is installed.
It just fails to work because of a syntax error (which would be a bug in pyttsx
had it claimed to support
R. David Murray added the comment:
Ah, I see. I'm still not convinced from a usability standpoint that calling it
a successful install when byte compilation failed is good, but I understand
your point. And yeah, the ImportError problem getting resolved would make it a
lot clearer what was
Ned Deily added the comment:
Alas, I don't think there is a bug in the import machinery, either. Note that
puttsx's __init__.py uses a pre-PEP 328 ambiguous relative import:
from engine import ...
Even if there were no syntax errors, in Python 3 that would have to be spelled:
from .engine
R. David Murray added the comment:
Oh, right. I forgot to look back at the original report. It does show that
pyttsx was installed, since the error is coming from its __init__.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Mark Lawrence added the comment:
All, and especially Ned, thank you for the detailed explanations, I do
appreciate it.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue20846
___
New submission from Mark Lawrence:
Trying to install pyttsx you get Successfully installed pyttsx despite the
syntax errors and you can't actually do an import.
c:\Users\Mark\CrossCodec:\Python34\Scripts\pip3.4.exe install pyttsx
Downloading/unpacking pyttsx
Downloading pyttsx-1.1.tar.gz
R. David Murray added the comment:
I think I've observed other occasions when PIP claimed a successful install but
the install had actually failed. PIP is still an independent project, so this
should be reported on the PIP tracker at https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues.
As for running 2to3
Mark Lawrence added the comment:
Just awesome, from my viewpoint PEP 453 and #19347 were a complete and utter
waste of time.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue20846
___
R. David Murray added the comment:
Why? Before the PEP and its implementation, you would have had to first
install pip before you could have had the problems you reported. So, at least
one annoying step was eliminated. Now we'll work on the other bugs and issues
with python packaging.
Mark Lawrence added the comment:
This should have been tested before it got into a release candidate, not left
to users to find such a blatantly obvious bug. I'll leave the PEP authors to
sort this out, I've no intention of spending my time clearing up their mess.
--
Ned Deily added the comment:
It's not a bug and has nothing to do with pip per se. The PyPI entry of this
package makes no claims that it is supported on Python 3 nor does its README.
PEP 453 does not make any claims to add new capabilities to pip to
automatically try to transform packages
R. David Murray added the comment:
Well, the fact that a syntax error can result in a successful install message
is a bug *somewhere*, and like I said I've seen this before with pip (on linux,
so this issue has nothing to do with windows).
I guess it's a distutils bug, and falls into that
Mark Lawrence added the comment:
From PEP 453 Abstract - This PEP proposes that the Installing Python Modules
guide in Python 2.7, 3.3 and 3.4 be updated to officially recommend the use of
pip as the default installer for Python packages, and that appropriate
technical changes be made in
Éric Araujo added the comment:
Can you assume good faith from the people involved and stay civil in the
discussion?
--
nosy: +eric.araujo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue20846
Ned Deily added the comment:
This is existing behavior. The error messages are coming from Distutils doing
a byte compile (producing .pyc) on .py files it is installing. AFAIK, that has
always been treated as a warning in all versions of Distutils; changing that
behavior now could break the
15 matches
Mail list logo
