Debian Bug report logs - #840673
python-pkg-resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library

Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 18:43:17 +0100

Package: dput
Version: 0.10.3

Steps to reproduce:
  apt-get install dput
  dput

Observe output:

  (build)root@zealot:~# dput
  Traceback (most recent call last):
    File "/usr/bin/dput", line 6, in <module>
      from pkg_resources import load_entry_point
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2991, in <module>
      @_call_aside
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2977, in _call_aside
      f(*args, **kwargs)
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 3004, in _initialize_master_working_set
      working_set = WorkingSet._build_master()
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 662, in _build_master
      ws.require(__requires__)
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 970, in require
      needed = self.resolve(parse_requirements(requirements))
    File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 856, in resolve
      raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers)
  pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Message #10 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

To: 840673@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: pkg_resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools

Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 05:30:09 +1100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: reassign -1 python-pkg-resources
Control: retitle -1 pkg_resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools
Control: merge 836710 -1
Control: affects 836710 dput
Control: summary 836710 0

The ‘pkg_resources’ documentation explicitly makes ‘load_entry_point’
available, but the current ‘pkg_resources’ library does not provide
this function in the absence of ‘setuptools’.

This means packages depending on ‘python{,3}-pkg-resources’, and not
‘…-setuptools’, will get a “DistributionNotFound” error from
‘pkg_resources’ when using its ‘load_entry_point’ function.

Reassigning this report with the one already reported against the
‘python-pkg-resources’ package.

-- 
 \      “Holy priceless collection of Etruscan snoods, Batman!” —Robin |
  `\                                                                   |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #29 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

To: 840673@bugs.debian.org,

Cc: dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 16:51:04 +0000

Ian Jackson writes ("dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library"):
>   (build)root@zealot:~# dput
...
>       raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers)
>   pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput

Are there any plans to fix this in python ?  (I'm not really familiar
enough with the python module and loading system to do so myself.)

It's causing the debci for dgit to fail, because dput is
nonfunctional.  Perhaps dput ought to get a dependency for now ?

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Message #34 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Goirand Thomas (aka zigo)" <thomas@goirand.fr>

To: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Cc: dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 21:44:31 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Nov 9, 2016 5:56 PM, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Ian Jackson writes ("dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library"): 
> >   (build)root@zealot:~# dput 
> ... 
> >       raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers) 
> >   pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput 
>
> Are there any plans to fix this in python ?  (I'm not really familiar 
> enough with the python module and loading system to do so myself.) 

Every python module is installed with an "egg-info" folder
containing a "require.txt" file that contains Python module deps.

What's happening here is probably dput having a Python dep
on setuptools but it's not expressed in the Debian package's
runtime Depends:. The way to fix it would be patching the
dput Python requires (probably, that's in setup.py), or add the
Depends: python-setuptools in the dput package. But I haven't
looked at the issue so I can't tell which one of actions to do.

I hope this will help fixing you CI,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

On Nov 9, 2016 5:56 PM, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

Ian Jackson writes ("dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library"):
>   (build)root@zealot:~# dput
...
>       raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers)
>   pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput

Are there any plans to fix this in python ?  (I'm not really familiar
enough with the python module and loading system to do so myself.)

It's causing the debci for dgit to fail, because dput is
nonfunctional.  Perhaps dput ought to get a dependency for now ?

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #39 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: "Goirand Thomas (aka zigo)" <thomas@goirand.fr>, 840673@bugs.debian.org, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

Cc: dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 22:34:14 +0100

On 09.11.2016 21:44, Goirand Thomas (aka zigo) wrote:
> 
> On Nov 9, 2016 5:56 PM, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Ian Jackson writes ("dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library"): 
>>>   (build)root@zealot:~# dput 
>> ... 
>>>       raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers) 
>>>   pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput 
>>
>> Are there any plans to fix this in python ?  (I'm not really familiar 
>> enough with the python module and loading system to do so myself.) 
> 
> Every python module is installed with an "egg-info" folder
> containing a "require.txt" file that contains Python module deps.
> 
> What's happening here is probably dput having a Python dep
> on setuptools but it's not expressed in the Debian package's
> runtime Depends:. The way to fix it would be patching the
> dput Python requires (probably, that's in setup.py), or add the
> Depends: python-setuptools in the dput package. But I haven't
> looked at the issue so I can't tell which one of actions to do.

it's surprising that dput would need a dependency on the setuptools egg instead
of the pkg_resources egg.  A dependency on the setuptools egg just sounds plain
wrong.

Do you have a test case why a dependency on the setuptools egg is needed?

Matthias

Message #44 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

Cc: "Goirand Thomas \(aka zigo\)" <thomas@goirand.fr>, 840673@bugs.debian.org, dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 21:51:14 +0000

Matthias Klose writes ("Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]"):
> On 09.11.2016 21:44, Goirand Thomas (aka zigo) wrote:
> > What's happening here is probably dput having a Python dep
> > on setuptools but it's not expressed in the Debian package's
> > runtime Depends:. The way to fix it would be patching the
> > dput Python requires (probably, that's in setup.py), or add the
> > Depends: python-setuptools in the dput package. But I haven't
> > looked at the issue so I can't tell which one of actions to do.

I don't think this is right.

See Ben Finney's message here:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=836710#10

> it's surprising that dput would need a dependency on the setuptools
> egg instead of the pkg_resources egg.  A dependency on the
> setuptools egg just sounds plain wrong.
> 
> Do you have a test case why a dependency on the setuptools egg is needed?

Is this likely to be relevant ?

(build)root@zealot:/home/ian# egrep . /usr/share/dput/dput-0.10.3.egg-info/requires.txt
setuptools
python-debian
(build)root@zealot:/home/ian#

Also, I don't understand how python module loading stuff works, but
the behaviour I see below makes things quite hard to test:

(build)root@zealot:/home/ian# dput
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/dput", line 6, in <module>
    from pkg_resources import load_entry_point
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2994, in <module>
    @_call_aside
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2980, in _call_aside
    f(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 3007, in _initialize_master_working_set
    working_set = WorkingSet._build_master()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 658, in _build_master
    ws.require(__requires__)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 966, in require
    needed = self.resolve(parse_requirements(requirements))
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 852, in resolve
    raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers)
pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'setuptools' distribution was not found and is required by dput
(build)root@zealot:/home/ian# cp /usr/bin/dput .
(build)root@zealot:/home/ian# python ./dput
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "./dput", line 6, in <module>
    from pkg_resources import load_entry_point
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2994, in <module>
    @_call_aside
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 2980, in _call_aside
    f(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 3007, in _initialize_master_working_set
    working_set = WorkingSet._build_master()
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 658, in _build_master
    ws.require(__requires__)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 966, in require
    needed = self.resolve(parse_requirements(requirements))
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/pkg_resources/__init__.py", line 852, in resolve
    raise DistributionNotFound(req, requirers)
pkg_resources.DistributionNotFound: The 'dput==0.10.3' distribution was not found and is required by the application
(build)root@zealot:/home/ian# 


-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Message #49 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Cc: "Goirand Thomas (aka zigo)" <thomas@goirand.fr>, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 18:37:23 +0000

Hi Matthias (2016.11.09_21:34:14_+0000)
> it's surprising that dput would need a dependency on the setuptools egg instead
> of the pkg_resources egg.  A dependency on the setuptools egg just sounds plain
> wrong.

I think what's going on here is that the egg-info for setuptools is in
the setuptools package, not the pkg-resources package. pkg-resources is
refusing to do anything unless it can resolve the requirements of the
package in question, which in this case includes setuptools. So even
though it has everything it needs on hand, it isn't doing anything.

If we're rewriting dependencies from setuptools to pkg-recources, we
should ship the setuptools egg-info in pkg-resources.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272

Message #58 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Cc: "Goirand Thomas (aka zigo)" <thomas@goirand.fr>, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, dput@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput missing a dependency on python setuptools library [and 1 more messages]

Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 14:42:15 +0100

On 12.11.2016 19:37, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Matthias (2016.11.09_21:34:14_+0000)
>> it's surprising that dput would need a dependency on the setuptools egg instead
>> of the pkg_resources egg.  A dependency on the setuptools egg just sounds plain
>> wrong.
> 
> I think what's going on here is that the egg-info for setuptools is in
> the setuptools package, not the pkg-resources package. pkg-resources is
> refusing to do anything unless it can resolve the requirements of the
> package in question, which in this case includes setuptools. So even
> though it has everything it needs on hand, it isn't doing anything.
> 
> If we're rewriting dependencies from setuptools to pkg-recources, we
> should ship the setuptools egg-info in pkg-resources.

shipping the setuptools egg-info in pkg-resources would be worse, announcing a
module which might not be present.  The immediate fix for dput would be to patch
the egg info, removing the setuptools egg, and handle the requirements by the
Debian dependencies.

I think it's still worth having the pkg-resources available as a "runtime
dependency", without having the setuptools packages installed.   Now filed
https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863 as well.

Message #63 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>

To: 840673@bugs.debian.org

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:00:37 -0500

I think one of the problems is that while in Debian, pkg_resources and
setuptools are separate binary packages, it's not entirely clear to me that
upstream views them as different packages.  After all, they are Python
packages distributed in the same git repo and tarball.  Debian's separation of
them is a bit artificial.

You could solve this by promoting *-pkg-resources Suggests of *-setuptools to
a Depends, but that sets up a circular package dependency since *-setuptools
Depend on *-pkg-resources.  In a sense I think that reflects the bootstrapping
issues raised by upstream in GH#863.

Does it ever make sense to install pkg_resources and not install setuptools?
I'm not so sure, but collapsing them at this point is probably more intrusive
than what we want.  Another option would be to create new meta packages which
Depend on both *-pkg_resources and *-setuptools and encourage people to Depend
on that.

Ultimately for this specific case, I think it's just easier if dput added a
Depends on python-setuptools.

Message #68 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: (no subject)

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 17:39:46 +0100

On 15.12.2016 16:00, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I think one of the problems is that while in Debian, pkg_resources and
> setuptools are separate binary packages, it's not entirely clear to me that
> upstream views them as different packages.  After all, they are Python
> packages distributed in the same git repo and tarball.  Debian's separation of
> them is a bit artificial.
> 
> You could solve this by promoting *-pkg-resources Suggests of *-setuptools to
> a Depends, but that sets up a circular package dependency since *-setuptools
> Depend on *-pkg-resources.  In a sense I think that reflects the bootstrapping
> issues raised by upstream in GH#863.
> 
> Does it ever make sense to install pkg_resources and not install setuptools?
> I'm not so sure, but collapsing them at this point is probably more intrusive
> than what we want.  Another option would be to create new meta packages which
> Depend on both *-pkg_resources and *-setuptools and encourage people to Depend
> on that.

yes, or else we really should merge gcc and libgcc into one package ...

And I'm not forcing anyone to remove all their reverse deps on pkg_resources if
they don't want to build with setuptools.

> Ultimately for this specific case, I think it's just easier if dput added a
> Depends on python-setuptools.

https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863

disagreed, dput should just remove setuptools from the requires.

Message #73 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>

Cc: 840673@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: (no subject)

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 11:44:12 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Dec 15, 2016, at 05:39 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:

>disagreed, dput should just remove setuptools from the requires.

I agree that the bug should be fixed in dput.  It's up to dput's maintainer to
decide how I suppose.  Sounds like there's agreement we should reassign this
bug back to dput.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #82 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: pkg_resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools

Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 07:01:32 +1100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 15-Dec-2016, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 15.12.2016 16:00, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > Does it ever make sense to install pkg_resources and not install
> > setuptools?

Yes. The ‘pkg_resources’ library allows a program to access its
package resources, while most Python programs don't need to build
Python distributions and hence don't need Setuptools.

> https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863

Thanks for raising that.

> disagreed, dput should just remove setuptools from the requires.

The ‘setuptools’ library *is* needed to build the package. Are you
saying that it does not belong in the ‘install_requires’ list?

On 15-Dec-2016, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I agree that the bug should be fixed in dput. It's up to dput's
> maintainer to decide how I suppose. Sounds like there's agreement we
> should reassign this bug back to dput.

I am not yet convinced :-) Please explain how the ‘setup.py’ is
incorrect now?

-- 
 \           “'Tis strange, — but true; for truth is always strange; / |
  `\    Stranger than fiction.” —“Lord” George Gordon Noel Byron, _Don |
_o__)                                                            Juan_ |
Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #87 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: pkg_resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:09:27 +0100

On 15.12.2016 21:01, Ben Finney wrote:
> On 15-Dec-2016, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 15.12.2016 16:00, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>> Does it ever make sense to install pkg_resources and not install
>>> setuptools?
> 
> Yes. The ‘pkg_resources’ library allows a program to access its
> package resources, while most Python programs don't need to build
> Python distributions and hence don't need Setuptools.
> 
>> https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863
> 
> Thanks for raising that.
> 
>> disagreed, dput should just remove setuptools from the requires.
> 
> The ‘setuptools’ library *is* needed to build the package. Are you
> saying that it does not belong in the ‘install_requires’ list?

my understanding is that the exception is raised when people try to run dput
without having python-setuptools installed. so yes, for the debian context, you
should remove it from the ‘install_requires’ list and make sure that
python-pkg-resources ends up in the package's Depends.

> On 15-Dec-2016, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> I agree that the bug should be fixed in dput. It's up to dput's
>> maintainer to decide how I suppose. Sounds like there's agreement we
>> should reassign this bug back to dput.
> 
> I am not yet convinced :-) Please explain how the ‘setup.py’ is
> incorrect now?

it's incorrect in the Debian context, where we have the split
pkg-resources/setuptools packages. In the past we needed that to be able to
build packages without setuptools but using pkg_resources. the pkg_resources
should not check for the presence of the setuptools egg at runtime.

Matthias

Message #92 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Cc: dh-python@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: pkg_resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools

Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 18:02:41 +1100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 15-Dec-2016, Matthias Klose wrote:
> In the past we needed that [split into ‘python-pkg-resources’ and
> ‘python-setuptools’ binary packages] to be able to build packages
> without setuptools but using pkg_resources.

Yes, that's exactly my purpose for depending on
‘python-pkg-resources’. What are you saying has changed? As far as I
can tell there is still the need to have ‘pkg_resources’ available
separately.

The ‘dh-python’ suite is currently detecting dependencies from the
Distutils information; the binary package has only “${python:Depends}”
which is then populated automatically. Is this perhaps a bug in that
detection? What should I describe to the ‘dh-python’ maintainer?

-- 
 \     “If you're a horse, and someone gets on you, and falls off, and |
  `\      then gets right back on you, I think you should buck him off |
_o__)                                        right away.” —Jack Handey |
Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #97 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput: Handle ‘pkg_resources’ specially to work around circular dependency

Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:29:28 +1100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: clone -1 -2
Control: retitle -1 dput: Handle ‘setuptools’ specially to work around circular dependency
Control: affects -1 dput
Control: reassign -2 python-pkg-resources
Control: retitle -2 python-pkg-resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools
Control: forwarded -2 https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863

On 15-Dec-2016, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Sounds like there's agreement we should reassign this bug back to
> dput.

I've also observed consensus in this discussion that the behaviour
described is a bug upstream in ‘pkg_resources’.

I am cloning this report to reflect both the requested change to
‘dput’, and that acknowledged bug in ‘python-pkg-resources’ upstream.

-- 
 \         “A man must consider what a rich realm he abdicates when he |
  `\                       becomes a conformist.” —Ralph Waldo Emerson |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #104 received at 840673@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org>, 840673@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#840673: dput: Handle ‘pkg_resources’ specially to work around circular dependency

Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:38:19 +1100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: reassign -1 python-pkg-resources
Control: retitle -1 python-pkg-resources: ‘load_entry_point’ crashes without Setuptools
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863
Control: unmerge 836710
Control: retitle 836710 dput: Handle ‘setuptools’ specially to work around circular dependency
Control: affects 836710 - dput

On 15-Dec-2016, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Sounds like there's agreement we should reassign this bug back to
> dput.

I've also observed consensus in this discussion that the behaviour
described is a bug upstream in ‘pkg_resources’.

I am cloning an existing report (after chiding by debbugs about merged
reports) to reflect both the requested change to ‘dput’, and that
acknowledged bug in ‘python-pkg-resources’ upstream.

-- 
 \         “A man must consider what a rich realm he abdicates when he |
  `\                       becomes a conformist.” —Ralph Waldo Emerson |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org>

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.