Skip to content

Automatically do --no-use-pep517 builds, even without wheel #13358

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Automatically do --no-use-pep517 builds, even without wheel #13358

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+2 −5

Conversation

stefanor
Copy link
Contributor

In #13330 I removed the command line argument check for this, but I hadn't realized that there were also heuristics that needed to be fixed.

@stefanor stefanor force-pushed the no-use-pep517-wheel branch from 1d3f370 to d35a098 Compare April 28, 2025 16:58
@stefanor stefanor marked this pull request as draft April 28, 2025 17:01
@stefanor stefanor force-pushed the no-use-pep517-wheel branch from d35a098 to c6364c1 Compare April 28, 2025 17:02
@sbidoul
Copy link
Member

sbidoul commented Apr 28, 2025

I'm not sure we want to create additional churn in this area, since pep517 will soon be the only supported mode.

@stefanor
Automatically do --no-use-pep517 builds, even without wheel
3e836d2 
In pypa#13330 I removed the command line argument check for this, but I
hadn't realized that there were also heuristics that needed to be
fixed.
@stefanor stefanor force-pushed the no-use-pep517-wheel branch from c6364c1 to 3e836d2 Compare April 28, 2025 17:13
@sbidoul
Copy link
Member

sbidoul commented Apr 29, 2025

Also, if the setuptools version is old (not that old) and wheel is not installed, bdist_wheel will fail, so that would be a new failure mode.

So let's not do this.

@stefanor
Copy link
Contributor Author

Makes sense. I'd come to this, because I was updating (python-cffi/cffi#165) cffi's testsuite to handle the latest virtualenv without wheel (pypa/virtualenv#2868).

The test suite was expecting a non-pep517 build, even though it wasn't explicitly asking for one, and it took me embarrassingly long to figure out that I'd missed this bit of logic in #13330.

@sbidoul
Copy link
Member

sbidoul commented Apr 29, 2025

I'm curious why you need --no-use-pep517. Perhaps you just need --no-build-isolation?

@stefanor
Copy link
Contributor Author

stefanor commented Apr 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Ah yes, that works.

I went with --no-use-pep517 as that is what it was doing before, but indeed the issue is the isolation.

@sbidoul sbidoul closed this May 1, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bot:chronographer:provided
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@stefanor @sbidoul