[Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-19 Thread Erik Bray
Hello all, I've got a tricky problem I'm trying to deal with. Here's the scenario: I'm trying to build a package that has two requirements in setup_requires; let's say `setup_requires = ['package_A', 'package_B']`. The problem is that "package_B" also contains "package_A" in its own setup_require

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-19 Thread Erik Bray
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Erik Bray wrote: > Hello all, > I've got a tricky problem I'm trying to deal with.  Here's the scenario: > > I'm trying to build a package that has two requirements in > setup_requires; let's say `setup_requires = ['package_A', > 'package_B']`. > The problem is tha

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-19 Thread P.J. Eby
At 04:10 PM 5/19/2011 -0400, Erik Bray wrote: Hello all, I've got a tricky problem I'm trying to deal with. Here's the scenario: I'm trying to build a package that has two requirements in setup_requires; let's say `setup_requires = ['package_A', 'package_B']`. The problem is that "package_B" al

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-19 Thread P.J. Eby
At 04:35 PM 5/19/2011 -0400, Erik Bray wrote: Just to confirm my theory about this, I modified setuptools.sandbox.run_setup to also save off and restore pkg_resources.working_set.{entries,entry_keys,by_key}. This solves the problem, and the build works regardless of how my setup_requires are

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-20 Thread Tarek Ziadé
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Erik Bray wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Erik Bray wrote: >> Hello all, >> I've got a tricky problem I'm trying to deal with.  Here's the scenario: >> >> I'm trying to build a package that has two requirements in >> setup_requires; let's say `setup_req

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-22 Thread chiggsy
Are people still using setuptools? I thought that distribute was the new way forward...?___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-22 Thread P.J. Eby
At 11:28 AM 5/22/2011 -0700, chiggsy wrote: Are people still using setuptools? Yes. Over the last 9 hours alone, the 0.6 development snapshot version (0.6c12dev_r88795) was downloaded from over 100 unique IPs. They most likely represent people manually upgrading to the latest version, sinc

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-22 Thread Sebastien Douche
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 21:06, P.J. Eby wrote: > So, all the hype was pretty much just that: hype and FUD-slinging. Stop! We are tired of reading your perpetual whining. -- Sebastien Douche Twitter: @sdouche (agile, lean, python, git, open source) _

Re: [Distutils] distribute's sandboxing doesn't preserve working_set; leads to setup_requires problems

2011-05-22 Thread David Stanek
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 3:06 PM, P.J. Eby wrote: > > Not really. Unless you're using Python 3, or you want different default > options from setuptools, there's little advantage to using distribute. (It > also includes bugs that setuptools does not.) > > I agree. I spent a significant amount of