Two options in setup.py develop and install are confusing me. According to this site, using develop creates a special link to site-packages directory.
People have suggested that I use python setup.py install for a fresh installation and python setup.py develop after any changes have been made to the setup file.
Can anyone shed some light on the usage of these commands?
python setup.py install is used to install (typically third party) packages that you're not going to develop/modify/debug yourself.
For your own stuff, you want to first install your package and then be able to frequently edit the code without having to re-install the package every time — and that is exactly what python setup.py develop does: it installs the package (typically just a source folder) in a way that allows you to conveniently edit your code after it’s installed to the (virtual) environment, and have the changes take effect immediately.
Note: It is highly recommended to use pip install . (regular install) and pip install -e . (developer install) to install packages, as invoking setup.py directly will do the wrong things for many dependencies, such as pull prereleases and incompatible package versions, or make the package hard to uninstall with pip.
Update:
The develop counterpart for the latest python -m build approach is as follows (as per):
From the documentation. The develop will not install the package but it will create a .egg-link in the deployment directory back to the project source code directory.
So it's like installing but instead of copying to the site-packages it adds a symbolic link (the .egg-link acts as a multiplatform symbolic link).
That way you can edit the source code and see the changes directly without having to reinstall every time that you make a little change. This is useful when you are the developer of that project hence the name develop. If you are just installing someone else's package you should use install
Another thing that people may find useful when using the develop method is the --user option to install without sudo. Ex:
python setup.py develop --user
instead of
sudo python setup.py develop
Related
I've created a new RPM using python bdist_rpm . Normally python setup.py install would install python dependencies like websocket-client or any other package. But the RPM just refuses to install anything.
Apparently the suggestion from various other posts seem to be in the line of just requiring them in setup.cfg as rpm packages. This doesn't make sense to me since most of the rpm packages seem to be on really old version and I can't possibly create rpms for all the python packages i require. I need a much recent version and it doesn't make sense that the yum installs don't actually install the packages.
What is the right (clean and easiest) way to do it ? I believe if a setup.py has something like
install_requires=[
"validictory",
"requests",
"netlogger>=4.3.0",
"netifaces",
"pyzmq",
"psutil",
"docopt"
],
Then it should try to either include them in the rpm or try to install it.
I am trying on a clean centos vm using vagrant which I keep destroying and then install the rpm.
Well the super hack way i used was to just add a post install script with all the requirements as easy_install installation (instead of pip because older versions may not have pip and even after installing pip, the approach failed on systems with python 2.6)
#Adding this in setup.py
options = {'bdist_rpm':{'post_install' : 'scripts/rpm_postinstall.sh'}},
Then the script is as follows:
easy_install -U <pkgnames>
Of course a post_uninstall can also be added if you want to clean up which I wouldn't because you have no clue what is using the packages installed apart from this app.
The logic of the rpm approach seems to be for this but its honestly over engineering and I'd rather package all the modules with the rpm to ensure it always works. ** Screaming out for a cleaner solution **
This weekend I've been reading up on conda and the python packaging user guide because I have a simple pure python project that depends on numpy. It seemed to me that distributing/installing this project via conda was better than pip due to this dependency.
One thing on which I'm still not clear: conda will install a python package from a recipe in build.sh, but it seems like build.sh just ends up calling python setup.py install for most python packages.
So even if I want to distribute/install my python package with conda, I still end up depending on setuptools (or distutils) for the actual installation, correct? I was unable to find a conda utility analogous to setuptools; am I missing something?
FWIW, I posted this question on the conda issue tracker.
Thanks!
Typically you will still be using distutils (or setuptools if the library requires it) to install things, yes. It is not technically required. The build.sh can be anything. If you wanted to, you could just copy the code into site-packages. Using setup.py install is recommended, though, as libraries will already have setup.py working, it will install metadata that can be read by pip, and it will compile any extension modules and install any data files.
Is it possible to collect many Python extensions an install them in one step? I have a Python build environment for an open source project that often needs to be recreated on multiple machine. It's a pain to double click through a bunch of python extension exes every time we need to do this.
Ideally I'd like to package a complete build environment, Python, extensions, system environment variables, and all, into a one step install process. But a single step extension install would also be helpful. Is this possible?
Yes, you can do that... do you have pip(python indexed package) installed in your system?
if not, then install it... and put all the extensions into a single text file... say requirements.txt...
This is done by running
pip freeze > requirements.txt
then by using pip you can install it... by using this command...
pip install -r requirements.txt...
it will install all the extensions mentioned in the file...
you can find the pip package here pip
might help you...
You can with Distribute define dependencies of a package, and easy_install or pip will install all dependencies when you ask to install the package.
I'm wondering if there's a way to "install" single-file python modules using pip (i.e. just have pip download the specified version of the file and copy it to site-packages).
I have a Django project that uses several 3rd-party modules which aren't proper distributions (django-thumbs and a couple others) and I want to pip freeze everything so the project can be easily installed elsewhere. I've tried just doing
pip install git+https://github.com/path/to/file.git
(and tried with the -e tag too) but pip complains that there's no setup.py file.
Edit: I should have mentioned - the reason I want to do this is so I can include the required module in a requirements.txt file, to make setting up the project on a new machine or new virtualenv easier.
pip requires a valid setup.py to install a python package. By definition every python package has a setup.py... What you are trying to install isn't a package but rather a single file module... what's wrong with doing something like:
git clone git+https://github.com/path/to/file.git /path/to/python/install/lib
I don't quite understand the logic behind wanting to install something that isn't a package with a package manager...
The simplest way to deal with python package installations, so far, to me, has been to check out the source from the source control system and then add a symbolic link in the python dist-packages folder.
Clearly since source control provides the complete control to downgrade, upgrade to any branch, tag, it works very well.
Is there a way using one of the Package installers (easy_install or pip or other), one can achieve the same.
easy_install obtains the tar.gz and install them using the setup.py install which installs in the dist-packages folder in python2.6. Is there a way to configure it, or pip to use the source version control system (SVN/GIT/Hg/Bzr) instead.
Using pip this is quite easy. For instance:
pip install -e hg+http://bitbucket.org/andrewgodwin/south/#egg=South
Pip will automatically clone the source repo and run "setup.py develop" for you to install it into your environment (which hopefully is a virtualenv). Git, Subversion, Bazaar and Mercurial are all supported.
You can also then run "pip freeze" and it will output a list of your currently-installed packages with their exact versions (including, for develop-installs, the exact revision from the VCS). You can put this straight into a requirements file and later run
pip install -r requirements.txt
to install that same set of packages at the exact same versions.
If you download or check out the source distribution of a package — the one that has its "setup.py" inside of it — then if the package is based on the "setuptools" (which also power easy_install), you can move into that directory and say:
$ python setup.py develop
and it will create the right symlinks in dist-packages so that the .py files in the source distribution are the ones that get imported, rather than copies installed separately (which is what "setup.py install" would do — create separate copies that don't change immediately when you edit the source code to try a change).
As the other response indicates, you should try reading the "setuptools" documentation to learn more. "setup.py develop" is a really useful feature! Try using it in combination with a virtualenv, and you can "setup.py develop" painlessly and without messing up your system-wide Python with packages you are only developing on temporarily:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/virtualenv
easy_install has support for downloading specific versions. For example:
easy_install python-dateutil==1.4.0
Will install v1.4, while the latest version 1.4.1 would be picked if no version was specified.
There is also support for svn checkouts, but using that doesn't give you much benefits from your manual version. See the manual for more information above.
Being able to switch to specific branches is rarely useful unless you are developing the packages in question, and then it's typically not a good idea to install them in site-packages anyway.
easy_install accepts a URL for the source tree too. Works at least when the sources are in Subversion.