Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #95975 > unrolled thread

Need Help w. PIP!

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 15:20 -0700
    Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 01:05 +0100
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 18:04 -0700
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-09-04 02:44 +0100
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 11:55 +1000
          Re: Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 20:07 -0700
            Re: Need Help w. PIP! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:16 +1000
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 04:04 +0100
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:08 +1000
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 04:11 +0100
          Re: Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 09:35 -0700
            Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 21:55 +0100
            Re: Need Help w. PIP! eryksun <eryksun@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 17:48 -0500
            Re: Need Help w. PIP! eryksun <eryksun@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:50 -0500
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 04:27 +0100
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:32 +1000
          Re: Need Help w. PIP! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 01:13 -0700
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-04 09:14 -0400
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Chris Warrick <kwpolska@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:30 +0200
    Re: Need Help w. PIP! "ast" <nomail@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 08:16 +0200
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! "ast" <nomail@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 08:24 +0200
    Re: Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 09:04 -0700
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-04 21:46 +0100
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-09-05 01:55 +0100
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! Rob Hills <rhills@medimorphosis.com.au> - 2015-09-05 10:19 +0800
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:07 -0700
          Re: Need Help w. PIP! eryksun <eryksun@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 01:30 -0500
      Re: Need Help w. PIP! Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-09-05 10:14 +0200
        Re: Need Help w. PIP! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-09-09 01:53 -0400
        Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all (was: Need Help w. PIP!) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-09 16:09 +1000
        Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-09 17:20 +1000
        Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all (was: Need Help w. PIP!) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 17:24 +1000
        Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-09 17:38 +1000
        Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-09-09 04:16 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#96011

"ast" <nomail@invalid.com> a écrit dans le message de news:55e9372e$0$3019$426a34cc@news.free.fr...
>
> "Steve Burrus" <steveburrus28@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de 
> news:f0876c48-010e-4bf0-b687-dceefba97637@googlegroups.com...
> Well I hjave certainly noted more than once that pip is cont ained in Python 3.4. But I am having 
> the most extreme problems with simply typing "pip" into my command prompt and then getting back 
> the normal information on pip! I have repeatedly downloaded [to my Desktop] that get-pip.py file 
> then ran it. I even downloaded that easy-install.py and ran that but to no success! I have all of 
> the proper env. variables set. Can someone please help me?
>
>
> I am using python 3.4 on windows too and to run pip I just enter in a command window:
>
> py -m pip
>

Just typing 'pip' as you do does't work because pip.exe is located in Python\Scripts
directory which in not included on variable %PATH% 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96025

On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 5:20:17 PM UTC-5, Steve Burrus wrote:
> Well I hjave certainly noted more than once that pip is cont ained in Python 3.4. But I am having the most extreme problems with simply typing "pip" into my command prompt and then getting back the normal information on pip! I have repeatedly downloaded [to my Desktop] that get-pip.py file then  ran it. I even downloaded that easy-install.py and ran that but to no success! I have all of the proper env. variables set. Can someone please help me?

Well I think that this is a Win 10 "thing" befcause using previous versions of Windows all I had to do was to type in "pip" to get the pip info. but  now apparently it's "python -m pip". Can someone please "set me straight" about the path I should be using if I have a "pathing" problem?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96031

On 04/09/2015 17:04, Steve Burrus wrote:
> On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 5:20:17 PM UTC-5, Steve Burrus wrote:
>> Well I hjave certainly noted more than once that pip is cont ained in Python 3.4. But I am having the most extreme problems with simply typing "pip" into my command prompt and then getting back the normal information on pip! I have repeatedly downloaded [to my Desktop] that get-pip.py file then  ran it. I even downloaded that easy-install.py and ran that but to no success! I have all of the proper env. variables set. Can someone please help me?
>
> Well I think that this is a Win 10 "thing" befcause using previous versions of Windows all I had to do was to type in "pip" to get the pip info. but  now apparently it's "python -m pip". Can someone please "set me straight" about the path I should be using if I have a "pathing" problem?
>

Read 
https://docs.python.org/3/using/windows.html#excursus-setting-environment-variables 
and if you can install the Rapid Environment Editor 
http://www.rapidee.com/en/about

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96036

On 2015-09-05 01:35, Rob Hills wrote:
> On 05/09/15 01:47, Cody Piersall wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Steve Burrus
>> <steveburrus28@gmail.com <mailto:steveburrus28@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
> <..>
>> >> "echo %path%
>> >>
>> >> C:\Python34;C:\Python34\python.exe;C:\Python34\Scripts;
>
> It's a long time since I last used Windoze in anger, but that second
> path entry (C:\Python34\python.exe;) looks wrong to me.  Unless Windoze
> has changed recently, you shouldn't have a program name in your path.
> IIRC, that's going to break all path entries that follow it, so it could
> be the cause of your problem (ie the "C:\Python34\Scripts;" part won't
> be accessible.
>
> Perhaps try deleting the "C:\Python34\python.exe;" entry from your PATH
> environment variable and see what happens.
>
It should be a list of folder paths. Including a file path doesn't
appear to break it, and, in fact, I'd be surprised if it did; it should
just keep searching, much like it should if the folder were missing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96039

On 05/09/15 08:55, MRAB wrote:
> On 2015-09-05 01:35, Rob Hills wrote:
>> On 05/09/15 01:47, Cody Piersall wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Steve Burrus
>>> <steveburrus28@gmail.com <mailto:steveburrus28@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>> <..>
>>> >> "echo %path%
>>> >>
>>> >> C:\Python34;C:\Python34\python.exe;C:\Python34\Scripts;
>>
>> It's a long time since I last used Windoze in anger, but that second
>> path entry (C:\Python34\python.exe;) looks wrong to me.  Unless Windoze
>> has changed recently, you shouldn't have a program name in your path.
>> IIRC, that's going to break all path entries that follow it, so it could
>> be the cause of your problem (ie the "C:\Python34\Scripts;" part won't
>> be accessible.
>>
>> Perhaps try deleting the "C:\Python34\python.exe;" entry from your PATH
>> environment variable and see what happens.
>>
> It should be a list of folder paths. Including a file path doesn't
> appear to break it, and, in fact, I'd be surprised if it did; it should
> just keep searching, much like it should if the folder were missing.

You're probably right, but my recollection of Windoze is that it was
very easily broken, hence my migration to Linux many moons ago.  I
reckon it wouldn't hurt to try getting rid of the invalid path entry anyway.

Cheers,

-- 
Rob Hills
Waikiki, Western Australia

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96041

On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 9:20:14 PM UTC-5, Rob Hills wrote:
> On 05/09/15 08:55, MRAB wrote:
> > On 2015-09-05 01:35, Rob Hills wrote:
> >> On 05/09/15 01:47, Cody Piersall wrote:
> >>> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Steve Burrus
> >>> <steveburrus28@gmail.com <mailto:steveburrus28@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >> <..>
> >>> >> "echo %path%
> >>> >>
> >>> >> C:\Python34;C:\Python34\python.exe;C:\Python34\Scripts;
> >>
> >> It's a long time since I last used Windoze in anger, but that second
> >> path entry (C:\Python34\python.exe;) looks wrong to me.  Unless Windoze
> >> has changed recently, you shouldn't have a program name in your path.
> >> IIRC, that's going to break all path entries that follow it, so it could
> >> be the cause of your problem (ie the "C:\Python34\Scripts;" part won't
> >> be accessible.
> >>
> >> Perhaps try deleting the "C:\Python34\python.exe;" entry from your PATH
> >> environment variable and see what happens.
> >>
> > It should be a list of folder paths. Including a file path doesn't
> > appear to break it, and, in fact, I'd be surprised if it did; it should
> > just keep searching, much like it should if the folder were missing.
> 
> You're probably right, but my recollection of Windoze is that it was
> very easily broken, hence my migration to Linux many moons ago.  I
> reckon it wouldn't hurt to try getting rid of the invalid path entry anyway.
> 
well everyone there must be sometjhing about upgrading Python up to version 3.5 rc because everything works just fine now, beyond my wildest dreams! I am even able now to type in "pip" and get the usual info. on it and I have connected to the Django server and configured the admin so thanx for eveyone who tried to help me. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96046

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Steve Burrus <steveburrus28@gmail.com> wrote:
> well everyone there must be sometjhing about upgrading Python up to version 3.5 rc
> because everything works just fine now, beyond my wildest dreams! I am even able
> now to type in "pip" and get the usual info. on it and I have connected to the Django
> server and configured the admin so thanx for eveyone who tried to help me.

I just tested running pip.exe on a VM with Windows 10, build 10074. It
surprised me that it worked, so I checked the source code of Vinay's
[simple launcher][1]. Apparently the simpler launcher merely asserts
that creating the job object succeeds, so it will only fail in a debug
build. (See run_child in launcher.c). Depending on the nature of the
script it could be confusing if there's no job object and the launcher
gets killed. This leaves python.exe and the shell competing for
console input. That said, it shouldn't really matter for a simple
program such as pip.

But the full py.exe launcher used by Python always fails if creating
the job object doesn't succeed. (Oddly, it doesn't fail if *assigning*
the child to the job fails; I guess because Windows 7 lacks support
for job hierarchies, but still, it makes no sense to care about
creating something that you don't care about using.) So for build
10074 of Windows 10, ensure the filetypes for .py and .pyw scripts
(installed as Python.File and Python.NoConFile) run python.exe and
pythonw.exe instead of py.exe and pyw.exe. Otherwise you won't be able
to run scripts directly at the command prompt or by double clicking
them in Explorer.

[1]: https://bitbucket.org/vinay.sajip/simple_launcher/src

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96047

Cody Piersall wrote:

> Please respond to the list as well as the person you're actually talking
> to.  It works out better for everyone that way.   (You should just have to
> "reply all" instead of "reply").

“Better” as in “getting/reading/downloading the same message *twice*”?

The rule of thumb is: write here, read here.

Please see my sig and reconsider.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96161

On 9/8/2015 6:19 PM, Cody Piersall wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars@web.de <mailto:PointedEars@web.de>> wrote:
>  >
>  > Cody Piersall wrote:
>  >
>  > > Please respond to the list as well as the person you're actually
> talking
>  > > to.  It works out better for everyone that way.   (You should just
> have to
>  > > "reply all" instead of "reply").

[Reply] should send the reply to the list.

>  > “Better” as in “getting/reading/downloading the same message *twice*”?
>  >
>  > The rule of thumb is: write here, read here.
>
> Some people email the list, but aren't subscribed to it.  So I guess a
> better rule is to just reply-to-all for the OP?

Please no, not as a routine.  I intentionally read python-list as a 
newsgroup via gmane.news.org so I can pick messages as I feel like 
without my mailbox being flooded.  Anyone who want to read responses to 
something they send can do so via gmane.  Also, [Reply All] tends to 
collect multiple CC names, and most people don't have the curtesy to 
properly prune it.


-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96163 — Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all (was: Need Help w. PIP!)

Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> writes:

> On 9/8/2015 6:19 PM, Cody Piersall wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> > <PointedEars@web.de <mailto:PointedEars@web.de>> wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Cody Piersall wrote:
> >  >
> >  > > Please respond to the list as well as the person you're
> >  > > actually talking to. It works out better for everyone that way.
> >  > > (You should just have to "reply all" instead of "reply").
>
> [Reply] should send the reply to the list.

The function named “reply” normally means “reply individually to the
author”, and that's how it needs to stay.

The “reply to the list” function is present in many mail clients, and
works fine for this mailing list; Google Mail seems to be a notable
exception that its users should ask to change.

> > Some people email the list, but aren't subscribed to it.

People who fit that description are not participants in the forum, so
excluding them from forum replies is the right thing to do.

> > So I guess a better rule is to just reply-to-all for the OP?
>
> Please no, not as a routine.

Agreed.

-- 
 \       “Anyone who puts a small gloss on [a] fundamental technology, |
  `\          calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from |
_o__)           building on it, is a thief.” —Tim O'Reilly, 2000-01-25 |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96164 — Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all

Nick Sarbicki <nick.a.sarbicki@gmail.com> writes:

> My question then is do you reply to all (with a clean cc list but
> including an OP from outside the list) in response to a persons
> question

If the question was addressed to this forum, then answering the question
should also be addressed to this forum. So: reply to list.

> even if the question is relatively simple.

I don't think the simplicity of the question changes the above.

> For me it's appreciated so that you know someone is dealing with it.

If you're asking a question in a public discussion forum (such as this
one), then to see the ensuing dicussion you need to subscribe.

> But then it can also result in flooding your inbox.

If you don't want that, then don't have them delivered to your inbox.
You can, for example, filter messages that are part of this forum to a
separate mailbox; or you can subscribe using a non-email method such as
NNTP.

-- 
 \          “Courage is not the absence of fear, but the decision that |
  `\     something else is more important than fear.” —Ambrose Redmoon |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96166 — Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all (was: Need Help w. PIP!)

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Nick Sarbicki <nick.a.sarbicki@gmail.com> wrote:
> My question then is do you reply to all (with a clean cc list but including
> an OP from outside the list) in response to a persons question, even if the
> question is relatively simple.
>
> For me it's appreciated so that you know someone is dealing with it. But
> then it can also result in flooding your inbox.

Personally, what I do (which I'm doing with this post) is to use
Gmail's "reply-all" feature, and then manually delete the individual
addresses. Sometimes, half way through writing up a post, I decide to
send it privately rather than to the list, and then I delete the list
rather than the author. (Not usually with this list, though; more
often with Savoynet, where private replies are more common, and
there's no newsgroup equivalence.)

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96167 — Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all

Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:

> Personally, what I do (which I'm doing with this post) is to use
> Gmail's "reply-all" feature, and then manually delete the individual
> addresses.

That is testimony in support of the position that Google Mail is a
poorly-designed interface for discussion forums such as mailing lists.

Google Mail, like any other mail client, has full access to all the
technical information (specified in RFC 3696) needed to implement a
correct “reply to list” behaviour.

Users shouldn't need to do anything tediously manual like you describe,
they should be presented with an obvious “reply to the same place”
function, as implemented in many mail clients for over a decade.

That Google Mail continues to fail in this regard is something its users
need to apply pressure to fix, or choose better mail clients until it
improves.

-- 
 \      “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a |
  `\        finite world is either a madman or an economist.” —Kenneth |
_o__)                                                         Boulding |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#96170 — Re: Reply to author, reply to list, reply to all

On 9/9/2015 2:09 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> writes:

>> [Reply] should send the reply to the list.
>
> The function named “reply” normally means “reply individually to the
> author”, and that's how it needs to stay.

Oh, right.  I was thinking of 'Followup' and that should go to the list, 
and does for me.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web