This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author eric.araujo
Recipients alexis, carljm, eric.araujo, higery, michael.mulich
Date 2011-07-20.15:53:25
SpamBayes Score 5.5421e-10
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
I temporarily retract my request for addition of build_distinfo.

Other build_spam/install_spam commands have clear responsibilities: build creates files, install moves them.  This is the classic make/make install division of work, where you may want to run build frequently when updating C code, and you may want to run install as root.

For the dist-info files, we’ve seen that the RECORD file cannot be generated at build time, only install time, so splitting a build_distinfo command out of install_distinfo does not make sense.

The develop command can continue to call install_distinfo in the build dir, writing a RECORD file containing only the path to the pth file.  (Let’s continue that discussion on the develop bug.)

For the test command, we could either require people to run develop, or run install_distinfo in the build dir.  I think the latter is nicer.  Who wants to make a patch for that?

For the resources API, which should work even in an unbuilt checkout or unarchived tarball, that’s another bug.
Date User Action Args
2011-07-20 15:53:26eric.araujosetrecipients: + eric.araujo, carljm, alexis, michael.mulich, higery
2011-07-20 15:53:26eric.araujosetmessageid: <>
2011-07-20 15:53:26eric.araujolinkissue12279 messages
2011-07-20 15:53:25eric.araujocreate