3 ms·
I should clarify that I'm not saying remove the ability to install packages into a venv or even straight into the system. However this article is about making
by cycomanic 5y ago
I should clarify that I'm not saying remove the ability to install packages into a venv or even straight into the system.
However this article is about making pip to better interact with the system package manager on Linux. To me this seems like a bandaid solution instead of generating a rpm/deb file and installing this. You essentially get protection against overwriting other package files, but also protection against the package manager overwriting pip installed files for free. Instead we put a hack in place to add another db (a file) to check for both the system package manager and pip.
Clearly I'm missing something but why is nobody proposing this solution at least for this context?
- maple3142 5y agoI think it could because there are much more packaging format other than rpm/deb. What about Arch Linux, Gentoo or even BSDs? It is easier to maintain packages in the same way across platform.
- cycomanic 5y agoAs I said before you can still provide the other method for installing packages, but at least you cover >90% of all Linux installs (and I'm an arch user). The thing is simply if I need to install system packages I want them to show up in the system tools. The problem with pip and co doing their own thing is it never shows up in the system tools. That's the same on windows, I don't see it those in the software manager. As a user/admin that means I now need to keep track of one more tool to see what is installed on my system.