Hi,
I'm trying to file a bug report in bugzilla.redhat.com and seem to be having a hard time finding the package in question.
For some reason, even though the package exists in fc30, the bugzilla interface doesn't have python2-virtualenv in it's database and so I can't file the bug report.
FYI, it seems that down the road between fc28 and fc30 (don't have an fc29 handy to test this) the python2-virtualenv package doesn't come with `/usr/bin/virtualenv`. Is there a reason for the missing binary?
And in any case, how is it that bugzilla doesn't list a package that is clearly in the fc30 release?
# rpm -qa | grep python2-virtualenv python2-virtualenv-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch
Kind regards,
Hi,
Martín Marqués wrote:
I'm trying to file a bug report in bugzilla.redhat.com and seem to be having a hard time finding the package in question.
For some reason, even though the package exists in fc30, the bugzilla interface doesn't have python2-virtualenv in it's database and so I can't file the bug report.
FYI, it seems that down the road between fc28 and fc30 (don't have an fc29 handy to test this) the python2-virtualenv package doesn't come with `/usr/bin/virtualenv`. Is there a reason for the missing binary?
And in any case, how is it that bugzilla doesn't list a package that is clearly in the fc30 release?
# rpm -qa | grep python2-virtualenv python2-virtualenv-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch
The bugzilla component is the source rpm, not any of the multiple binary packages built from it. In this case, it's python-virtualenv. You can get the source rpm for a given package via 'rpm -qi <package>' or 'dnf info <package>'.
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 19:00:32 -0300 Martín Marqués martin.marques@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to file a bug report in bugzilla.redhat.com and seem to be having a hard time finding the package in question.
For some reason, even though the package exists in fc30, the bugzilla interface doesn't have python2-virtualenv in it's database and so I can't file the bug report.
FYI, it seems that down the road between fc28 and fc30 (don't have an fc29 handy to test this) the python2-virtualenv package doesn't come with `/usr/bin/virtualenv`. Is there a reason for the missing binary?
I can't answer the question about why /usr/bin/virtualenv isn't present in the python2 package, but it might have to do with the deprecation of python2 in fc30, and drop from fc31 to the extent possible (end of python2 maintenance is in 2020). It might only be in the python3 package.
And in any case, how is it that bugzilla doesn't list a package that is clearly in the fc30 release?
# rpm -qa | grep python2-virtualenv python2-virtualenv-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch
The src.rpm is python-virtualenv, and it creates
python-virtualenv-doc-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm python2-virtualenv-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm python2-virtualenv-python26-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm python3-virtualenv-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm python3-virtualenv-python26-16.0.0-7.fc30.noarch.rpm
So you should file the bugzilla against python-virtualenv.
On 6/2/19 3:00 PM, Martín Marqués wrote:
FYI, it seems that down the road between fc28 and fc30 (don't have an fc29 handy to test this) the python2-virtualenv package doesn't come with `/usr/bin/virtualenv`. Is there a reason for the missing binary?
From the package changelog: * Wed Aug 15 2018 Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com - 16.0.0-5 - Only have one /usr/bin/virtualenv (#1599422) - Provide "virtualenv" (#1502670)
/usr/bin/virtualenv is now provided by "python3-virtualenv". If you install that package, you should be able to use the -p argument to specify a python, or (IIRC) you can use "python2 -m virtualenv DIR".
If you've been waiting until the last minute to port your code to python3, this is it. This *is* the last minute. :)