[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.python

Using eggs

oj

1/11/2008 4:33:00 PM

Hi all!

As is about to become apparent, I really don't know what I'm doing
when it comes to using eggs.

I'm writing some software that is going to be deployed on a machine as
a number of eggs. Which is all well and good.

These eggs all end up depending on each other; modules in egg A want
to import modules in egg B etc.

It's not really practical to add the path to each individual egg to
the PYTHONPATH (although there's all in a directory that is in
PYTHONPATH).

Do I have to add boiler-plate code to the beginning of all the modules
with these dependencies to check if modules are available and require
the eggs if they aren't? Or is there a way I can have stuff 'just
work' as it does in the development environment when the modules
haven't been bundled up into eggs?

On a similar note, I can't seem to get the automatic script creation
stuff in setuptools to create scripts that have additional
requirements. I tried defining extra requires giving the names of
other eggs that will be required, and then specifying these as extras
to the console_scripts, but the generated scripts were no different.
Am I doing something wrong? Or am I just not understanding something?

I'm muddling through getting this all working at the moment, but I get
the distinct impression that there's a better (correct?) way that I'm
not aware of.

Sorry for such a vague posting.

-Oli
9 Answers

Mike Driscoll

1/11/2008 5:11:00 PM

0

On Jan 11, 10:33 am, oj <ojee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> As is about to become apparent, I really don't know what I'm doing
> when it comes to using eggs.
>
> I'm writing some software that is going to be deployed on a machine as
> a number of eggs. Which is all well and good.
>
> These eggs all end up depending on each other; modules in egg A want
> to import modules in egg B etc.
>
> It's not really practical to add the path to each individual egg to
> the PYTHONPATH (although there's all in a directory that is in
> PYTHONPATH).
>
> Do I have to add boiler-plate code to the beginning of all the modules
> with these dependencies to check if modules are available and require
> the eggs if they aren't? Or is there a way I can have stuff 'just
> work' as it does in the development environment when the modules
> haven't been bundled up into eggs?
>
> On a similar note, I can't seem to get the automatic script creation
> stuff in setuptools to create scripts that have additional
> requirements. I tried defining extra requires giving the names of
> other eggs that will be required, and then specifying these as extras
> to the console_scripts, but the generated scripts were no different.
> Am I doing something wrong? Or am I just not understanding something?
>
> I'm muddling through getting this all working at the moment, but I get
> the distinct impression that there's a better (correct?) way that I'm
> not aware of.
>
> Sorry for such a vague posting.
>
> -Oli

I know when I've asked questions about eggs and setup-tools, I was
referred to the Distutils user group. I would cross-post there for
double the fun!

http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/dis...

Mike

suzeeq

7/24/2014 12:42:00 AM

0

RichA wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:17:37 PM UTC-4, Hunter wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:03:41 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> 1 in 13 Americans are unemployed. For the feeble, that's 14% of the workforce. Not the fictional low number trumpeted by the lying administration.
>> ----
>>
>> You are very bad in math (strange since you were right about the
>> weight of the dirt in "The Strain"). One in thirteen or 1/13th is 7.7%
>> and what edition of "Frontline" was this, a new one or a repeat?
>
> Reading issues? 1/13 of the AMERICAN PEOPLE. The workforce isn't 100% of the people, is it?


Then it's not a meaningful statistic. Especially if you include childrent.

Adam H. Kerman

7/24/2014 3:16:00 AM

0

suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>RichA wrote:
>>On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:17:37 PM UTC-4, Hunter wrote:
>>>RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>1 in 13 Americans are unemployed. For the feeble, that's 14% of
>>>>the workforce. Not the fictional low number trumpeted by the lying
>>>>administration.

>>>You are very bad in math (strange since you were right about the
>>>weight of the dirt in "The Strain"). One in thirteen or 1/13th is 7.7%
>>>and what edition of "Frontline" was this, a new one or a repeat?

>>Reading issues? 1/13 of the AMERICAN PEOPLE. The workforce isn't 100%
>>of the people, is it?

>Then it's not a meaningful statistic. Especially if you include childrent.

Are there no prisons?. . . And the Union workhouses. Are they
still in operation? . . .

I help to support the establishments I have mentioned-they cost
enough; and those who are badly off must go there.

--Many can't go there; and many would rather die.

If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease
the surplus population.

-- Scrooge, A Christmas Carol

Include the children!

suzeeq

7/24/2014 3:21:00 AM

0

Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>> RichA wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:17:37 PM UTC-4, Hunter wrote:
>>>> RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> 1 in 13 Americans are unemployed. For the feeble, that's 14% of
>>>>> the workforce. Not the fictional low number trumpeted by the lying
>>>>> administration.
>
>>>> You are very bad in math (strange since you were right about the
>>>> weight of the dirt in "The Strain"). One in thirteen or 1/13th is 7.7%
>>>> and what edition of "Frontline" was this, a new one or a repeat?
>
>>> Reading issues? 1/13 of the AMERICAN PEOPLE. The workforce isn't 100%
>>> of the people, is it?
>
>> Then it's not a meaningful statistic. Especially if you include childrent.
>
> Are there no prisons?. . . And the Union workhouses. Are they
> still in operation? . . .
>
> I help to support the establishments I have mentioned-they cost
> enough; and those who are badly off must go there.
>
> --Many can't go there; and many would rather die.
>
> If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease
> the surplus population.
>
> -- Scrooge, A Christmas Carol
>
> Include the children!

Yes, and the prisoners and whomever. Or not. The 14% still doesn't say
anything about the unemployment rate unless the population is defined.

Liberal $500 million tax dollar disaster

7/24/2014 8:28:00 AM

0

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/07/05/why-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-higher-than-...

Hunter

7/24/2014 9:04:00 AM

0

On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:36:37 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:17:37 PM UTC-4, Hunter wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 19:03:41 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >1 in 13 Americans are unemployed. For the feeble, that's 14% of the workforce. Not the fictional low number trumpeted by the lying administration.
>>
>> ----
>>
>> You are very bad in math (strange since you were right about the
>>
>> weight of the dirt in "The Strain"). One in thirteen or 1/13th is 7.7%
>>
>> and what edition of "Frontline" was this, a new one or a repeat?
>
>Reading issues? 1/13 of the AMERICAN PEOPLE. The workforce isn't 100% of the people, is it?
-----
No it isn't but 1/13th of anything is still 7.7% of something.

One divided by thirteen aka 1/13=.076923; then .076923*100=7.6923
Rounded off=7.7 or 7.7% There is no way you get 14% out of 1/13

If you talking about 100 people then 7.7% of that is 7.7 people (of
course you round up to 8 people). If you are talking about 1000 people
then that is 77 people.

If you are counting every man woman and child in the US of any age
including say 1 minute olds and the elderly who will die one minute
from now-all the American People-then 1/13th of 350 million is
26,923,050.

Of course the size of the workforce isn't all of the people. I think
you misunderstood something along the way. You will have to give me a
number of what you mean. How did you get 14%?

------>Hunter

"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."

-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907

suzeeq

7/24/2014 2:31:00 PM

0

RichA wrote:
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/07/05/why-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-higher-than-...

It still doesn't say 1/13 of all Americans or even 14% of all Americans.
1/13 is not even mentioned in the article.

suzeeq

7/24/2014 2:33:00 PM

0

RichA wrote:
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/07/05/why-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-higher-than-...
>

The article is also from July of last year.

Dano

7/24/2014 4:16:00 PM

0

"suzeeq" wrote in message news:lqr5el$o0r$2@dont-email.me...

RichA wrote:
>
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/07/05/why-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-higher-than-...
>

The article is also from July of last year.

===============================================

Oh...so he's finally getting caught up eh?