Ian Bicking wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2009/10/9 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>: >> >>> Ian Bicking <ianb <at> colorstudy.com> writes: >>> >>>> Someone mentioned that easy_install provided some things pip didn't; >>>> outside of multi-versioned installs (which I'm not very enthusiastic >>>> about) I'm not sure what this is? >>>> >>> http://pip.openplans.org/#differences-from-easy-install >>> >>> If it's obsolete the website should be updated... >>> >> Specifically, combine "only installs from source" with "might not work >> on Windows" and the result is pretty certainly unusable for C >> extensions on Windows. You can pretty much guarantee that the average >> user on Windows won't have a C compiler[1], and even if they do, they >> won't be able to carefully line up all the 3rd party C libraries >> needed to build some extensions. >> >> Binary packages are essential on Windows. >> > > I'll admit I have some blindness when it comes to Windows. I agree > binary installation on Windows is important. (I don't think it's very > important on other platforms, or at least not very effective in > easy_install so it wouldn't be a regression.) > > I note some other differences in that document: > > >> It cannot install from eggs. It only installs from source. (Maybe this will be changed sometime, but it’s low priority.) >> > > Outside of binaries on Windows, I'm still unsure if installing eggs > serves a useful purpose. I'm not sure if eggs are any better than > wininst binaries either...? > > Many Windows users would be quite happy if the standard mechanism for installing non-source distributions on Windows was via the wininst binaries. I wonder if it is going to be possible to make this compatible with the upcoming distutils package management 'stuff' (querying for installed packages, uninstallation etc) since installation/uninstallation goes through the Windows system package management feature. I guess it would be eminently possible but require some reasonably high level Windows-fu to do. Michael >> It doesn’t understand Setuptools extras (like package[test]). This should be added eventually. >> > > I haven't really seen Setuptools' extras used effectively, so I'm > unsure if it's a useful feature. I understand the motivation for > extras, but motivated features aren't necessarily useful features. > > >> It is incompatible with some packages that customize distutils or setuptools in their setup.py files. >> > > I don't have a solution for this, and generally easy_install does not > perform much better than pip in these cases. Work in Distribute > hopefully will apply to this issue. > > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4