Bug#499699: setuptools issue
So, one issue I just noticed about the proposed packaging is that,
because it uses python-support instead of pyshared, it tickles some
bugs in setuptools that show up in our Tahoe project. It seems that
setuptools is not as good at finding metadata in python-support
-provided packages as in pyshared -provided ones.
http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue17 has more information.
We have a workaround for this
(http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/229 has details), by
adding "--site-dirs /var/lib/python-support/python2.5" to the setup.py
command line. However, trying to build Tahoe against the proposed
python-support -based package fails in a new way, with an error like:
pkg_resources.UnknownExtra: foolscap 0.3.2 has no such extra feature
'secure_connections'
which suggests that our workaround is insufficient to get setuptools to
see the "extra feature" metadata
in /usr/share/python-support/python-foolscap/foolscap-0.3.2.egg-info/requires.txt .
I believe this is a setuptools bug, and when we get some time we'll add
it to setuptools-issue17 (or a new issue), but since our hackish
workaround was good enough for a while, I wanted to ask:
How hard would it be to use python-support instead of pyshared for the
new python-foolscap package?
It would make our lives (as Tahoe users/developers) easier, as well as
any other folks who are writing programs who all three of (foolscap,
setuptools, the setuptools 'extra feature' feature to indicate that
their program requires SSL-based foolscap connections).
thanks,
-Brian
Reply to: