Re: PYTHONPATH issue explanation

[iyzsong@member.fsf.org (宋文武)]

Hartmut Goebel <h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I agree with Ricardo: We first should agree on what we want to
> implement.

Okay.

>
> I created a pad at [1] for collecting all test-cases and the expected
> results. Please add you test-cases there. Thanks!
>
> [1] https://semestriel.framapad.org/p/guix-python-site-packages-test-cases

I have append some text, it's available to all in realtime?
not sure how it works...

>
> Am 17.03.2018 um 02:41 schrieb 宋文武:
>
>> - "GUIX_PYTHON_X_Y_SITE_PACKAGES" […] is necessary for the "build" environment.
> For the build environment we could easily work around using PYTHONPATH.
> Since the build-system is clearly defined and does not interfere with
> any user-definitions, this is save to do.

Yes, but if "GUIX_PYTHON_X_Y_SITE_PACKAGES" does works (i hope so) in
the "profile" side, it's better to replace PYTHONPATH for consistent.

>
>> - Avoid any environment variable for the "profile" environment.
>>
>>   We have a union "profile" for all the python packages, so environment
>>   variables can be totally avoided with the help of "venv".
> […]
>>  We only need to make the "profile"
>>   a "venv" for python.  For python3, a simple "pyvenv.cfg" file is
>>   enough, for python2 I guess we have to make a union or copy files like
>>   what "virtualenv" does.
>
> This would be a very elegant solution. Unfortunately this does not work
> as shown in part 2 of my analysis, esp. point 4a.

A workaround for the broke case maybe tell the user to create a
"sitecustomize.py" in the created venv, and add the search paths of
profile himself.


I'd like do more tests with the GUIX_PYTHON_X_Y_SITE_PACKAGES option
(patch sent), hope it works :-)