-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
installation path shouldn't be hardcoded in setup.py #61
Comments
Because it was installing the data into the modules dir which obviously doesn't work. I mentioned in the commit that it wasn't a portable solution. setuptools seems like a horrible tool for distributing an actual application so if anyone knows of a solution let me know... |
Thanks for quick reply. I manually changed absolute paths to what I need, and it worked OK with --user. Except for the icons, that were not installed into ~/.local/share. But that's not a problem for me, because my icon theme supports pithos icons, and as long as there is pithos.desktop file in ~/.local/share/application (and there is one now), the pithos icon is shown in taskbar. While searching for my problem solution, I have encountered many talks about pip being superior than setuptools (easy install). I have no idea how it works, just thought it might be worth mentioning. |
+1 we should fix this |
From http://pythonhosted.org//setuptools/setuptools.html?highlight=data%20files#non-package-data-files
We basically have to do the installing for the installer, since nobody in Python land has solved such a basic problem yet... |
Or, maybe change the installer. This is why I mentioned people moving to other more flexible solutions. |
(slightly off-topic but might save people some pain in the future with pithos or other Python programs)
If for some reason, setup.py does not have the executable bit set, run |
Recently attempted to install this from source, but to no avail. I continued to get an error where Gst was confused whether it was supposed to use 0.1 or 1.0. Also in building I noted that there are some dependencies which only allow the use of python2.7< (python-gst0.1) while others require python3+. I'm really curious as to what magic occurs duing packaging that allows this to even work. |
@davelupt David, this is what I did the last time I was installing it:
|
@scottkosty Thanks for your suggestion, but the problem is not with a wrong python version. Though it might have contributed as well, so you are right about this. However, the problem with the older version seems to be that it has hard-coded links to a global directory, and this prevents from installing locally for a user without manual changing of |
@davelupt 1.0.0+ requires only Python 3. |
@TingPing Thank you for your prompt reply. Could you then please provide installation instructions for the newer version for a local one-user installation? |
What you said is correct, you just replace the hard-coded paths in setup.py and install like normal. |
@dbfin and @TingPing Thank you for your assistance with this issue. I attempted to compile 1.0.1 using the equivalent of --prefix=$HOME. I must also mention that I was attempting to compile it essentially from the ground up. In doing so I faced numerous challeneges with getting gtk+ and its dependencies working. Is there a guide/preferred method for doing this beyond what is provided by linuxfromscratch.org? |
@davelupt Why would you be compiling anything? If you're on an ancient distro that doesn't have Gtk 3.10 just upgrade your distro... |
@TingPing Ubuntu 12.04 is still in support. The first few days of crashing continually after the initial release of 14.04 was a large deterrent for me. There's something to be said about being a bug reporter, but it was out of hand. It may be time now that 14.04.1 is out to revisit it. I would however like for this to be possible. Having a robust package manager is nice, but there's something to be said for compiling from source and knowing exactly where everything is. So basically, I like this software, but I'm hard headed and think that technically this should be possible. |
Has anyone been able to solve this and put together some sort of documentation for installing locally from source? I've been using pithos for years while pulling every once in awhile - I don't think I've done it in a very long time; however, I tried to just now and I'm running into tons of issues. I have a clone of the pithos repo in /opt/pithos. In the past I've been able to just run
I thought it might be due to the python version I'm running
So I ran explicitly with python 3 after seeing master requires it (this should probably be thrown by the application), but I still get the same error
So as I've read above, I decided to go try the 0.3.18_4 with python2 and I get the following error:
So it looks like now, because I decided to pull from where I was, I have no way of running pithos. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. |
|
The way I run 0.3.18_4 locally for a user is
|
fwiw, I never run setup.py. I just git clone, cd pithos, and 'python3 -m pithos' |
@gregsheremeta That seems to be the same thing as just running
I'm not really that familiar with python, so I'm trying to track down what this error and how to resolve it. |
@gregsheremeta Ok. You're not crazy and neither am I. Simply cloning and running |
master works perfectly for me on Fedora 20. I just verified. What OS are you on? Can you try on a fresh vm? |
|
@isleshocky77 GstPbutils is provided by |
@gregsheremeta Thanks for the info, Greg. It is good to know you can run it without installation. However, as it is stated in the bug title, I was wondering if it is something with my system, that I cannot install it locally for one user, and it seems it is not. The installation is supposed to do some things such as checking dependencies, creating menu links, etc. And it does, once I change hard-coded paths in setup.py. |
I have tried to install from source on Linux without root permissions for a single user, but it failed. When I was installing it same way about a year ago, something like this
python setup.py install --prefix=$HOME/.local
worked. Now, it gives me an error about not being able to copy icons to /usr/share/... I tried --user and other options as well.
I asked about this on Stack Overflow, and they pointed at this commit: 8035c0e, that has explicitly hardcorded the installation paths for some reason.
If this is indeed the reason for why I cannot install it, then what would be the best way to work-around the issue. Why are these paths hardcoded?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: