Mailing List Archive

Am Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:43:47PM -0700 schrieb Mats Wichmann via Python-list:

> >I had just hoped someone here might have a handy pointer for
> >how to deal with modules having to be installed from pip for
> >use with an apt-installed python-based application.
>
> That just shouldn't happen - such packages are supposed to be dependency-complete within
> the packaging universe in question.

Yep, that's the preferable ideal world.

Which doesn't happen (but that's not the fault of anyone
around here, no harm intended).

.From all the posts I gather the answer to my question is
"simply": unpackaged-but-needed modules need to be packaged.

Karsten
--
GPG 40BE 5B0E C98E 1713 AFA6 5BC0 3BEA AC80 7D4F C89B
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

On 11/6/2023 5:04 PM, Karsten Hilbert via Python-list wrote:
> Am Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:43:47PM -0700 schrieb Mats Wichmann via Python-list:
>
>>> I had just hoped someone here might have a handy pointer for
>>> how to deal with modules having to be installed from pip for
>>> use with an apt-installed python-based application.
>>
>> That just shouldn't happen - such packages are supposed to be dependency-complete within
>> the packaging universe in question.
>
> Yep, that's the preferable ideal world.
>
> Which doesn't happen (but that's not the fault of anyone
> around here, no harm intended).
>
> .From all the posts I gather the answer to my question is
> "simply": unpackaged-but-needed modules need to be packaged.

I think there is one aspect that isn't getting consideration here. And
that is whether or not you want these packages installed in the default
system Python install. You might not. Maybe you want to get the latest
possible version of super-dooper-gui-helper, but one of its dependencies
doesn't play well with the system Python libraries. Or ... but you get
the point. There are probably many cases where you want *not* to
install into the system Python world. So you would need to come up with
an APT-based installer that doesn't do that.

Obviously it's not unthinkable; it is just one more thing to figure out.

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

> > .From all the posts I gather the answer to my question is
> > "simply": unpackaged-but-needed modules need to be packaged.
>
> I think there is one aspect that isn't getting consideration here. And
> that is whether or not you want these packages installed in the default
> system Python install. You might not.

Indeed, which is why all the fuzz about how to fill-in a venv from pip while
installing with apt :-)

With "properly" packaged modules one wouldn't risk (that much) system
breakage, at any rate.

> Maybe you want to get the latest
> possible version of super-dooper-gui-helper, but one of its dependencies
> doesn't play well with the system Python libraries. Or ... but you get
> the point. There are probably many cases where you want *not* to
> install into the system Python world. So you would need to come up with
> an APT-based installer that doesn't do that.
>
> Obviously it's not unthinkable;

Certainly not, it's just that I had hoped someone goes: look here
and all of this ...

> it is just one more thing to figure out.

... has been thought through before.

Thanks,
Karsten
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list