On Apr 3, 2008, at 5:56 AM, Andi Zeidler wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2008, at 11:50 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> The real problem, in this example, is that
>> system-installed eggs on ubuntu are installed in such a way that the
>> egg "location", the thing that gets added to the path is site-
>> packages.
>
> that doesn't only seem to be the case for ubuntu,
No, it's not just ububtu.
> but anyway, could
> you give me a hint on how they're installed the wrong way? or rather,
> what would be the correct way of installing them? is this about how
> the .pth looks?
They are following the recommended way. See "Creating system
packages", under
On Apr 3, 2008, at 5:56 AM, Andi Zeidler wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2008, at 11:50 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> The real problem, in this example, is that
>> system-installed eggs on ubuntu are installed in such a way that the
>> egg "location", the thing that gets added to the path is site-
>> packages.
>
> that doesn't only seem to be the case for ubuntu,
No, it's not just ububtu.
> but anyway, could
> you give me a hint on how they're installed the wrong way? or rather,
> what would be the correct way of installing them? is this about how
> the .pth looks?
They are following the recommended way. See "Creating system
packages", under
http:// peak.telecommun ity.com/ DevCenter/ setuptools# what-your- users-should- know
In particular "--single- version- externally- managed" .
The end result is that packages installed this way share a common
location, site-packages. I think this is extremely stupid.
If all you care about is installing one version of a distribution in a
system Python, this works fine, but it is a royal PITA for buildout.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation