[tahoe-lafs-trac-stream] [tahoe-lafs] #2044: investigate setuptools 0.7+

[tahoe-lafs]

#2044: investigate setuptools 0.7+
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
     Reporter:  daira    |      Owner:
         Type:  defect   |     Status:  new
     Priority:  major    |  Milestone:  soon
    Component:           |    Version:  1.10.0
  packaging              |   Keywords:  packaging setuptools security
   Resolution:           |  review-needed
Launchpad Bug:           |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by zooko):

 I just read through our revision control history of the bundled copy of
 setuptools, and here are all the patches that I saw that we applied that
 aren't (or weren't) in upstream setuptools:

 * [changeset:c045241a5505684831f7c0fed74f94e8ec0a7e8e]: two changes: 1.
 some changes to launcher on Windows (see #1074), and 2. if site.py was not
 generated by setuptools, treat this as just a warning, not an error:
 [changeset:c045241a5505684831f7c0fed74f94e8ec0a7e8e/trunk#file20 code]
 (#1074)
 * [changeset:4d785cfe3079a7f09f30621d4e4dba69460599ef]: "this version
 completes my patch to fix ​http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue54 ,
 which is necessary for tahoe to build with --prefix=support without doing
 a lot of PYTHONPATH gymnastics around the call to setup.py"
 * [changeset:5c0d937eececedbc98d16829f33a6765b7058f38]: "Hopefully this
 one fixes the issue with easy_install not searching the sys.path for
 packages that were requested to be installed,
 ([http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue17 setuptools #17]), thus
 allowing us to do away with the "--site-dirs=" kludges, which are
 currently breaking some of our buildbots." I believe that
 [http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue17 setuptools #17] is fixed in
 newer setuptools's, although there was at one point a regression that
 broke it again in "distribute", so the very latest setuptools's might have
 inherited that regression if they are now taking code back from
 "distribute".
 * [changeset:4d785cfe3079a7f09f30621d4e4dba69460599ef] "this version
 completes my patch to fix ​http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue54 ,
 which is necessary for tahoe to build with --prefix=support without doing
 a lot of PYTHONPATH gymnastics around the call to setup.py"; This patch
 was never accepted into setuptools, at least not in setuptools v0.6,
 according to http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/issue54 .
 * [changeset:84cd0d991a1b121ab2d27d8cc09b37ba52ec2841] This was fixed in
 upstream distribute: https://bitbucket.org/tarek/distribute/issue/147
 /respect-the-sysdont_write_bytecode-flag .
 * [changeset:0e20ab6003dec602b3adb53b6ec029cd535bec98] "Tolerate import
 errors when loading extra commands for "setup.py --help-commands""
 * [changeset:06a8b1ea84fd67c019ef91c28c18ddcc9ea2ecb8] "pkg_resources:
 better error message on bad spec"

 That's all! There are only seven patches that we need to confirm whether
 they are fixed upstream, or port our patches to the new setuptools, or
 decide that we don't mind a regression by losing this patch.

 Also dstufft mentioned that he would be willing to consider accepting
 these patches upstream if they aren't already there.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/2044#comment:4>
tahoe-lafs <https://tahoe-lafs.org>
secure decentralized storage