I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

enumeler · 2021-12-17 03:16:20

I have used Arch for 2+ years and one thing I have noticed alot was how alot of times, python based programs were the ones that crashed after the update. When I investigated, it was mostly because the python dependencies were being upgraded causing incompatibility.

Python already has a great package manager called 'pip' right? And PyPI, the source for pip maintains all the versions of packages. Why not just have the maintainers only use pip with the specific version of the package rather than trying to install python dependencies with pacman? Maby remove all the python-* packages entirely?

An end user does not necessarily think about using venv and things like that, so I think maintainers can implement a shell script that gets executed when the user launches the python program that sets up everything before launching the program rather than launching the program itsef directly. Because again, different programs require different versions of libraries and it is better to use venv for that.

Please dont kill me if what I said here is wrong

Trilby · 2021-12-17 03:51:49

enumeler wrote:

... python based programs were the ones that crashed after the update. When I investigated, it was mostly because the python dependencies were being upgraded causing incompatibility.

No, it was because you were using repo packages for dependencies but manually installing some "programs" with pip. Either that or you were doing partial upgrades. Neither are supported, and each would be on you.

enumeler wrote:

Maby remove all the python-* packages entirely?

Feel free to remove them all from your system and just use pip. This sounds like a complete PITA to me, but you are free to do so. Why would you want to make everyone else to do this though? No one is making you install repo python-* packages.

loqs · 2021-12-17 04:04:51

Trilby wrote:

No, it was because you were using repo packages for dependencies but manually installing some "programs" with pip. Either that or you were doing partial upgrades. Neither are supported, and each would be on you.

Sometimes it does happen with repo packages https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/70918 or https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/72480

ayekat · 2021-12-17 05:48:44

enumeler wrote:

Maby remove all the python-* packages entirely?

So would you also remove everything that's been written in Python from the repos? Or just anything written in Python that depends on some python-… package? Or how do you expect dependencies to be tracked, if not by pacman?

seth · 2021-12-17 09:26:18

enumeler wrote:

An end user does not necessarily think about using venv and things like that

Errheeemm… "An end user"… so we're projecting again?

If you didn't screw some PIP packages into the system paths the most likely cause is you updated python but forgot to rebuild a bunch of AUR packages?

ayekat wrote:

So would you also remove everything that's been written in Python from the repos?

I guess his idea would rather amount to the python leaf packages' post-install scripts resolving their dependencies w/ pip - though I guess at this point all packages currently depending on some python-* package would simply have to move to the AUR because of the external dependencies.
Of course nothing would prevent one from adding such packages to the AUR itfp.

icar · 2021-12-17 11:47:16

If you are missing a python package that is only available through pip, you could install it on your home folder and add the corresponding path to your $PATH. Or, if you care very much, writing a PKGBUILD is quite easy.

Xyne · 2021-12-17 12:13:23

enumeler wrote:

Please dont kill me if what I said here is wrong

It's not worthy of a capital punishment, just a light beating.

ugjka · 2021-12-17 12:56:48

icar wrote:

If you are missing a python package that is only available through pip, you could install it on your home folder and add the corresponding path to your $PATH. Or, if you care very much, writing a PKGBUILD is quite easy.

I always do "pip install --user" when I can't be bothered with pacman

Trilby · 2021-12-17 14:25:16

loqs wrote:

Sometimes it does happen with repo packages ...

Sure, but packaging bugs can happen with non-python packages too. That doesn't mean nothing should be packaged. And a couple examples of packaging bugs does not imply that this happens a lot, and it certainly doesn't imply that it happens alot.

seth · 2021-12-17 14:31:11

What means we're all having a half-serious debate on the base of innuendo and so create a fictional context for our comments.
e.f.q.

Arch Linux

#1 2021-12-17 03:16:20

I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#2 2021-12-17 03:51:49

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#3 2021-12-17 04:04:51

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#4 2021-12-17 05:48:44

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#5 2021-12-17 09:26:18

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#6 2021-12-17 11:47:16

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#7 2021-12-17 12:13:23

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#8 2021-12-17 12:56:48

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#9 2021-12-17 14:25:16

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

#10 2021-12-17 14:31:11

Re: I think it is better if pacman does not handle python dependencies

Board footer