On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 00:10 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 23:54 -0500, Elliot Lee wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Michael Weiner wrote: > > > > > > Unfortunately, the Python community is becoming intoxicated with eggs! > > > > > > > > Is there a strategy (preferably backed by rpm macros) to deal with this > > > > - ie sanely packaging all egg'd installed prerequisites?? > > > > Having just become familiar with this stuff myself yesterday, it seems > > like it should be fairly simple to package up the .egg's themselves. I > > think the main challenge is to come up with a way of automatically turning > > egg dependencies (both provides & requires) into rpm dependencies... This > > should be doable with minimal rpm modifications. .egg's already have all > > the information necessary to do this. > > Certainly it is feasible to write a script that could look at setup.py > after the fact and extract the requirements from there, or even to > inject a bit of code into setuptools itself. Provides might require a > little more work unless we switch to using the python() namespace. > > > The biggest challenge I ran into was getting setuptools to recognize the > > existence of some non-eggd dependencies. For example, python-elementtree > > was installed but setuptools keeps insisting that it couldn't find > > cElementTree >= 0.2. This is more of a pythonland issue than an rpmland > > issue, but we'll definitely have to address it in order to make .eggs work > > nicely. > > Unfortunately [c]ElementTree et al will be a persistent issue until > either setuptools becomes part of Core, or the maintainers of the Python > packages in Core are convinced to include additional information within > the package (which may or may not be egg information). If you look at > how I did it in TurboGears you see that I commented out the packages in > setup.py that don't provide egg/package information, but this certainly > isn't something we want to do long-term. > Why can't we do what debian and conary is doing already for eggs. there's some option you can pass in for packaging this sort of thing, iirc. -sv -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
