No, setuptools parses the install requirements before acting on setup
requirements. That is the source of the problem. If setuptools only
parsed and acted on setup requirements before even parsing install
requirements, this wouldn't be an issue.
03.05.2016, 21:26, Leonardo Rochael Almeida kirjoitti:
On 3 May 2016 at 15:07, Alex Grönholm <alex.gronh...@nextday.fi
<mailto:alex.gronh...@nextday.fi>> wrote:
Having setuptools process the setup requirements before parsing
install requirements would be a good step forward. Had that been
done before, we could've just added a setup requirement for a
newer setuptools to enable PEP 508 conditional requirements.
Setuptools does process setup requirements before install
requirements. The "chicken and egg" issue with setuptools is that,
most of the time, setup requires are needed to calculate information
that is passed into the `setup()` call itself.
For example information on header files coming from the C api of
`numpy` which is used to build extensions.
This usually means importing code from the packages in "setup
requires" before setuptools has a chance to actually look at it.
A simple fix would be to allow `setup()` keywords to accept functions
as well as direct values and only invoke the functions when the values
are actually needed, but this idea never gained traction.
Of course, even if this was implemented, it wouldn't help directly
with "setup requiring" a new version of setuptools itself, unless
setuptools detected this situation and reinvoked setup.py from scratch.
Regards,
Leo
03.05.2016, 21:04, Daniel Holth kirjoitti:
We did separate build from install. Now we just want to be able
to build without [having to emulate] distutils; just having some
dependencies installed before setup.py runs would also be a great
boon.
I'm reading part of this conversation as "a simple bdist_wheel
bug is a reason to do a lot of work standardizing file formats"
which I find unfortunate.
If he is still up for it let Robert implement his own PEP as the
way forward for build system abstraction. The extra PEPs are just
delaying action.
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 1:11 PM Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com
<mailto:p.f.mo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 3 May 2016 at 17:47, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io
<mailto:don...@stufft.io>> wrote:
> It will likely get decided as part of the build system PEP,
whenever that
> gets picked up again.
Yes, but on 15th March
(https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2016-March/028457.html)
Robert posted
> Just to set expectations: this whole process seems stalled
to me; I'm
> going to context switch and focus on things that can move
forward.
> Someone please ping me when its relevant to put effort in
again :).
And I think that's right. The whole build system PEP issue
appears
stalled from a lack of someone willing (or with the time) to
make a
call on the approach we take.
As far as I'm aware, the decision remains with Nick. With the
possible
exception of Donald's proposal (which AFAIK never got formally
published as a PEP) everything that can be said on the other
proposals
has been said, and the remaining differences are ones of
choice of
approach rather than anything affecting capabilities. (Robert's
message at
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2016-March/028437.html
summarised the state of the 3 proposals at the time).
I think this is something that should be resolved - we don't
appear to
be gaining anything by waiting, and until we have a decision
on the
approach that's being taken, we aren't going to get anyone
writing
code for their preferred option.
Nick - do you have the time to pick this up? Or does it need
someone
to step up as BDFL-delegate? Robert, Nathaniel, do you have
time to
spend on a final round of discussion on this, on the
assumption that
the goal will be a final decision at the end of it? Donald,
do you
have the time and interest to complete and publish your proposal?
Paul
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
<mailto:Distutils-SIG@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist -Distutils-SIG@python.org
<mailto:Distutils-SIG@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
<mailto:Distutils-SIG@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
