Alan Gauld via Python-list writes:
> On 18/05/2024 19:12, Piergiorgio Sartor via Python-list wrote:
>
> >> So venvs make managing all that pretty convenient. Dunno why everybody's
> >> so down on venvs...
>
> Not so much down on them, they are just one extra step that's
> mostly not needed(in my use case)
Years ago, I used to have trouble with pip install --user on Debian --
sometimes things would end up under .local, sometimes in other places that I've
forgotten. So I reluctantly started using venvs.
And you know, they work fine. I have one master venv that I created with
python3 -m venv --system-site-packages ~/pythonenv/envname
and I activate that automatically when I log in, so when I need to install
anything that Debian doesn't package, I just pip install it (no --user or
--break-system-packages needed) and it installs to that venv.
Every so often I need to regenerate it (like when Debian updates the system
Python version) but that's easy to do: I don't try to duplicate what's
installed there, I just delete the old venv, create a new one and then pip
install packages as needed.
I have a few special venvs (without --system-site-packages) for specific
purposes, but most of the time I'm just using my default venv and it's all
pretty transparent and automatic.
I know this isn't the usual pythonista model of "you should have a zillion
different venvs, one for each program you use, and never use system Python
packages", but it works well for me: my pip installed packages are all in a
predictable place, and I get security updates for all the software Debian
*does* package. That's my biggest beef with pip, the lack of an easy way to
update everything at once, and it's the reason I prefer Debian packages when
available.
...Akkana
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
