[openstack-dev] Is Routes==2.3.1 a binary only package or something?

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Mon Jun 12 10:55:50 UTC 2017


On 06/12/2017 04:29 AM, Michael Still wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm trying to explain this behaviour in stable/newton, which specifies
> Routes==2.3.1 in upper-constraints:
> 
> $ pip install --no-binary :all: Routes==2.3.1
> ...
>   Could not find a version that satisfies the requirement Routes==2.3.1
> (from versions: 1.5, 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.6, 1.6.1, 1.6.2, 1.6.3, 1.7, 1.7.1,
> 1.7.2, 1.7.3, 1.8, 1.9, 1.9.1, 1.9.2, 1.10, 1.10.1, 1.10.2, 1.10.3,
> 1.11, 1.12, 1.12.1, 1.12.3, 1.13, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4.1)
> Cleaning up...
> No matching distribution found for Routes==2.3.1
> 
> There is definitely a 2.3.1 on pip:
> 
> $ pip install Routes==2.3.1
> ...
> Successfully installed Routes-2.3.1 repoze.lru-0.6 six-1.10.0
> 
> This implies to me that perhaps Routes version 2.3.1 is a binary-only
> release and that stable/newton is therefore broken for people who don't
> like binary packages (in my case because they're building an install
> image for an architecture which doesn't match their host architecture).
> 
> Am I confused? I'd love to be enlightened.

Routes 2.3.1 appears to be any arch wheel. Is there a specific reason
that's not going to work for you? (e.g. Routes-2.3.1-py2.py3-none-any.whl)

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list