Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16895 > unrolled thread
| Started by | PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-06-11 16:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 5 on this page of 25 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python
dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 16:00 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 16:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 17:10 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 17:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 17:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 17:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 17:40 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 18:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 17:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> - 2025-06-11 17:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> - 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 18:10 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 17:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 17:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-06-11 18:40 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2025-06-11 18:40 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging stefanor@debian.org - 2025-06-11 19:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging stefanor@debian.org - 2025-06-12 11:30 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-12 11:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-12 11:40 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> - 2025-06-11 19:40 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging thomas@goirand.fr - 2025-06-11 20:50 +0200
Re: dpkg-buildpackage vs sbuild with python packaging Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> - 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-06-12 11:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <KWMJj-a1oU-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #16918 |
I found the culprite :).. a malformed entry_point. "toto.test" instead of "toto.test:main" Is there a linter for the pyprojects file ? Thanks for your help. Fred
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-06-12 11:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <KWMpX-a1gZ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #16914 |
thanks you all,
I added a MANIFEST.in file and create an entry point for the application script
I end up with this error
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/licenses/LICENSE'
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/METADATA'
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/WHEEL'
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/entry_points.txt'
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/top_level.txt'
adding 'xrdutils-0.0.4.dist-info/RECORD'
removing build/bdist.linux-x86_64/wheel
Successfully built xrdutils-0.0.4-py3-none-any.whl
I: pybuild plugin_pyproject:144: Unpacking wheel built for python3.13 with "installer" module
E: pybuild pybuild:389: build: plugin pyproject failed with:
dh_auto_build: error: pybuild --build -i python{version} -p 3.13 returned exit code 13
make: *** [debian/rules:11: binary] Error 25
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules binary subprocess returned exit status 2
The error message is quite usefull :))
cheers
Fred
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel <frederic-emmanuel.picca@synchrotron-soleil.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-06-11 19:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <KWxqW-9Rsf-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #16913 |
> Hi thomas (2025.06.11_16:30:15_+0000) >>As for the version, setuptools-scm understand an env var that you may set with >>something like: >>export SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog -something) the same kind of things is availalbe also for hatchling-vcs ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thomas@goirand.fr |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-06-11 20:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <KWyGm-9ShT-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #16913 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Jun 11, 2025 18:51, Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi thomas (2025.06.11_16:30:15_+0000) > >As for the version, setuptools-scm understand an env var that you may set with something like: > >export SETUPTOOLS_SCM_PRETEND_VERSION=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog -something) > > You don't need to do that, pybuild does it for you. > > Stefano Yeah, IF using pybuild... :) (Which I am these days, though it is not mandatory) Thomas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-06-11 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <KWw1Q-9QpA-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #16904 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 03:35:54PM +0000, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi PICCA (2025.06.11_15:10:53_+0000) > > And indded via sbuild there is no .git directory so setuptools-scm do not provide the list. > > > > Do we know how to deal with this at the pacakging level. the upstream is using the code from the git repository, so it is not affected by this issue... > > This is a sitation where upstream tarballs are preferable to git. > > If you use an sdist, the egg-info / dist-info in the sdist will contain a > file list that setuptools-scm can use. Yeah, that's something I thought I would mention, but I thought I'd try it first and then I forgot :) It is entirely possible that basing the Debian packaging on the sdist tarball would "just work". G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@debian.org peter@morpheusly.com PGP key: https://www.ringlet.net/roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python
csiph-web