On May 06, 2011, at 04:43 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: >I don't quite understand this. On my Ubuntu system, with either Ubuntu's >Python 2.6 or my compiled 3.2, sys.path[0] appears to always be the >empty string, never the actual full path of the script's directory. How >is it ever == '/usr/share/pyshared' for you?
Even in the subprocess, i.e. when the Popen.subprocess() re-invokes sys.executable with the full path to the virtualenv.py file? >I was going to say that for a slightly less Debian-specific form of >paranoia, could we only delete sys.path[0] if its in fact the empty >string? But there seems to be something I'm still missing. See above. It makes sense too, given how Python initializes sys.path. I think the extra paranoia (whether Debian-specific or not) probably isn't necessary. sys.path[0] just isn't needed. >> Another suggestion given was to put virtualenv.py in a private directory, >> i.e. not in Debian's equivalent of site-packages. I don't know whether there >> are other packages that try to import virtualenv.py though, so to be safe, I >> just went with the sys.path hacking. > >Yes, there is code out there that imports virtualenv and uses it >programmatically, and this is supported, so breaking it would be bad. Great to know, thanks! >Modulo my confusion about how your patch actually works, it seems like a >reasonable approach to me, and I'd consider applying a >non-Debian-specific version of the patch to virtualenv. Cool. Cheers, -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
