Path: csiph.com!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Andrey Rakhmatullin Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: RFC: Packaging pyartnet - Patch build system from uv to setuptools? Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2026 18:30:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Thu Jan 1 17:25:37 2026 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.998 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -3.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gnIaome2VKjlicaq" Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23557 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/aVat_hipoT1nCq2M@belkar.wrar.name Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 49 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2026 22:25:19 +0500 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17314 --gnIaome2VKjlicaq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 01, 2026 at 06:17:04PM +0100, Arian Ott wrote: >Hello everyone, > >I am currently packaging pyartnet for Debian (Bug: 1124471). The upstream >project uses uv as build backend. When building the package, gbp fails >since uv_build is unavailable and can't be imported. > >Pyartnet requires no significant external libraries. >Can I switch the build backend to setuptools using a patch or is this >considered bad practice? > >https://salsa.debian.org/Arian-Ott/pyartnet/-/blob/debian/latest/pyproject= =2Etoml?ref_type=3Dheads#L62-64 I would do that (and did for python-cryptography-vectors, though that=20 package is trivial and doesn't contain Python code, and I was just reverting an upstream change, not even writing my own patch). --=20 WBR, wRAR --gnIaome2VKjlicaq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJhBAABCgBLFiEEtf6ieDcfC1EgtGkao+OWn23e7IYFAmlWrf4tFIAAAAAAFQAP cGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3Jnd3JhckBkZWJpYW4ub3JnAAoJEKPjlp9t3uyG liIP/jJR7ubY4kXHnKJpnof9Uk+N3xd0uarDi9eawf7jiCPe8zMg9kafjZF2s1ro IsmSE+pQLVDy8btRPk/D6Py2MZibETECAQRxDNRRV5jOcIWyMLBMsTEfPa4Hx+D+ b3onnDLXXOdzHtg++QzyDHD/Slotq7xnljtyYbGQifTpoasirlz/Fv4N/ntYg9Wk MFi2tqRRDNQgrllPWEuZoTtju/oq41PgfXE0QOJGs1x0e4uRn2AfyOz1cTPgA1sz wlSJz+J6YnZmnS5dP2/ZnsDHVD6Xbqg8aZuAkgMv6wrm4GsaQ2Ib+TLmp1yimHWH zBwn7bGoO790I3vzk9UV7WYYkhGnHsD6TjQ043THHAjCrM3pcdHfmo/9Y5fvjIln sTAQ5txg7wBeKqsB53Qjnborv4JhcsMZqhX9X32IjQTMQ/8X/bHpJvT3PBZF8P08 u3Jhj+fmHKtOn3cdZ9lx65WtL1EiJmvQ6pE4aFdFdn/d/fEgyjBPJjcQwvaUlxgs 2PjhUDeFzWJbSctPNvzxpDA7J4vwGEw74QxWXcPf/4Agwt06Y2PTtK++3M6L5vVI c1LcYoBAjaE+V+A/tRz/LZIlhVKVtfpicLHdRKjDTQET53fqMcnnWPuOgKQoPZTa HOmPp/Edfff7DI4p5Hq8yKNb5zd0+wIaLb3370xdnc/yq55j =QO7v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gnIaome2VKjlicaq--