We Keep Coding

unable to load sublime text 3 package [duplicate]

I'm trying to write a plugin for Sublime Text 3.
I have to use several third party packages in my code. I have managed to get the code working by manually copying the packages into /home/user/.config/sublime-text-3/Packages/User/, then I used relative imports to get to the needed code. How would I distribute the plugin to the end users? Telling them to copy the needed dependencies to the appropriate location is certainly not the way to go. How are 3rd party modules supposed to be used properly with Sublime Text plugins? I can't find any documentation online; all I see is the recommendation to put the modules in the folder.

Sublime uses it's own embedded Python interpreter (currently Python 3.3.6 although the next version will also support Python 3.8 as well) and as such it will completely ignore any version of Python that you may or may not have installed on your system, as well as any libraries that are installed for that version.
For that reason, if you want to use external modules (hereafter dependencies) you need to do extra work. There are a variety of ways to accomplish this, each with their own set of pros and cons.
The following lists the various ways that you can achieve this; all of them require a bit of an understanding about how modules work in Python in order to understand what's going on. By and large except for the paths involved there's nothing too "Sublime Text" about the mechanisms at play.
NOTE: The below is accurate as of the time of this answer. However there are plans for Package Control to change how it works with dependencies that are forthcoming that may change some aspect of this.
This is related to the upcoming version of Sublime supporting multiple versions of Python (and the manner in which it supports them) which the current Package Control mechanism does not support.
It's unclear at the moment if the change will bring a new way to specify dependencies or if only the inner workings of how the dependencies are installed will change. The existing mechanism may remain in place regardless just for backwards compatibility, however.
All roads to accessing a Python dependency from a Sublime plugin involve putting the code for it in a place where the Python interpreter is going to look for it. This is similar to how standard Python would do things, except that locations that are checked are contained within the area that Sublime uses to store your configuration (referred to as the Data directory) and instead of a standalone Python interpreter, Python is running in the plugin host.
Populate the library into the Lib folder
Since version 3.0 (build 3143), Sublime will create a folder named Lib in the data directory and inside of it a directory based on the name of the Python version. If you use Preferences > Browse Packages and go up one folder level, you'll see Lib, and inside of it a folder named e.g. python3.3 (or if you're using a newer build, python33 and python38).
Those directories are directly on the Python sys.path by default, so anything placed inside of them will be immediately available to any plugin just as a normal Python library (or any of those built in) would be. You could consider these folders to be something akin to the site-packages folder in standard Python.
So, any method by which you could install a standard Python library can be used so long as the result is files ending up in this folder. You could for example install a library via pip and then manually copy the files to that location from site-packages, manually install from sources, etc.
Lib/python3.3/
|-- librarya
| `-- file1.py
|-- libraryb
| `-- file2.py
`-- singlefile.py
Version restrictions apply here; the dependency that you want to use must support the version of Python that Sublime is using, or it won't work. This is particularly important for Python libraries with a native component (e.g. a .dll, .so or .dylib), which may require hand compiling the code.
This method is not automatic; you would need to do it to use your package locally, and anyone that wants to use your package would also need to do it as well. Since Sublime is currently using an older version of Python, it can be problematic to obtain a correct version of libraries as well.
In the future, Package Control will install dependencies in this location (Will added the folder specifically for this purpose during the run up to version 3.0), but as of the time I'm writing this answer that is not currently the case.
Vendor your dependencies directly inside of your own package
The Packages folder is on the sys.path by default as well; this is how Sublime finds and loads packages. This is true of both the physical Packages folder, as well as the "virtual" packages folder that contains the contents of sublime-package files.
For example, one can access the class that provides the exec command via:
from Default.exec import ExecCommand
This will work even though the exec.py file is actually stored in Default.sublime-package in the Sublime text install folder and not physically present in the Packages folder.
As a result of this, you can vendor any dependencies that you require directly inside of your own package. Here this could be the User package or any other package that you're creating.
It's important to note that Sublime will treat any Python file in the top level of a package as a plugin and try to load it as one. Hence it's important that if you go this route you create a sub-folder in your package and put the library in there.
MyPackage/
|-- alibrary
| `-- code.py
`-- my_plugin.py
With this structure, you can access the module directly:
import MyPackage.alibrary
from MyPackage.alibrary import someSymbol
Not all Python modules lend themselves to this method directly without modification; some code changes in the dependency may be required in order to allow different parts of the library to see other parts of itself, for example if it doesn't use relative import to get at sibling files. License restrictions may also get in the way of this as well, depending on the library that you're using.
On the other hand, this directly locks the version of the library that you're using to exactly the version that you tested with, which ensures that you won't be in for any undue surprises further on down the line.
Using this method, anything you do to distribute your package will automatically also distribute the vendored library that's contained inside. So if you're distributing by Package Control, you don't need to do anything special and it will Just Work™.
Modify the sys.path to point to a custom location
The Python that's embedded into Sublime is still standard Python, so if desired you can manually manipulate the sys.path that describes what folders to look for packages in so that it will look in a place of your choosing in addition to the standard locations that Sublime sets up automatically.
This is generally not a good idea since if done incorrectly things can go pear shaped quickly. It also still requires you to manually install libraries somewhere yourself first, and in that case you're better off using the Lib folder as outlined above, which is already on the sys.path.
I would consider this method an advanced solution and one you might use for testing purposes during development but otherwise not something that would be user facing. If you plan to distribute your package via Package Control, the review of your package would likely kick back a manipulation of the sys.path with a request to use another method.
Use Package Control's Dependency system (and the dependency exists)
Package control contains a dependency mechanism that uses a combination of the two prior methods to provide a way to install a dependency automatically. There is a list of available dependencies as well, though the list may not be complete.
If the dependency that you're interested in using is already available, you're good to go. There are two different ways to go about declaring that you need one or more dependencies on your package.
NOTE: Package Control doesn't currently support dependencies of dependencies; if a dependency requires that another library also be installed, you need to explicitly mention them both yourself.
The first involves adding a dependencies key to the entry for your package in the package control channel file. This is a step that you'd take at the point where you're adding your package to Package Control, which is something that's outside the scope of this answer.
While you're developing your package (or if you decide that you don't want to distribute your package via Package Control when you're done), then you can instead add a dependencies.json file into the root of your package (an example dependencies.json file is available to illustrate this).
Once you do that, you can choose Package Control: Satisfy Dependencies from the command Palette to have Package Control download and install the dependency for you (if needed).
This step is automatic if your package is being distributed and installed by Package Control; otherwise you need to tell your users to take this step once they install the package.
Use Package Control's Dependency system (but the dependency does not exist)
The method that Package Control uses to install dependencies is, as outlined at the top of the question subject to change at some point in the (possibly near) future. This may affect the instructions here. The overall mechanism may remain the same as far as setup is concerned, with only the locations of the installation changing, but that remains to be seen currently.
Package Control installs dependencies via a special combination of vendoring and also manipulation of the sys.path to allow things to be found. In order to do so, it requires that you lay out your dependency in a particular way and provide some extra metadata as well.
The layout for the package that contains the dependency when you're building it would have a structure similar to the following:
Packages/my_dependency/
├── .sublime-dependency
└── prefix
└── my_dependency
└── file.py
Package Control installs a dependency as a Package, and since Sublime treats every Python file in the root of a package as a plugin, the code for the dependency is not kept in the top level of the package. As seen above, the actual content of the dependency is stored inside of the folder labeled as prefix above (more on that in a second).
When the dependency is installed, Package Control adds an entry to it's special 0_package_control_loader package that causes the prefix folder to be added to the sys.path, which makes everything inside of it available to import statements as normal. This is why there's an inherent duplication of the name of the library (my_dependency in this example).
Regarding the prefix folder, this is not actually named that and instead has a special name that determines what combination of Sublime Text version, platform and architecture the dependency is available on (important for libraries that contain binaries, for example).
The name of the prefix folder actually follows the form {st_version}_{os}_{arch}, {st_version}_{os}, {st_version} or all. {st_version} can be st2 or st3, {os} can be windows, linux or osx and {arch} can be x32 or x64.
Thus you could say that your dependency supports only st3, st3_linux, st3_windows_x64 or any combination thereof. For something with native code you may specify several different versions by having multiple folders, though commonly all is used when the dependency contains pure Python code that will work regardless of the Sublime version, OS or architecture.
In this example, if we assume that the prefix folder is named all because my_dependency is pure Python, then the result of installing this dependency would be that Packages/my_dependency/all would be added to the sys.path, meaning that if you import my_dependency you're getting the code from inside of that folder.
During development (or if you don't want to distribute your dependency via Package Control), you create a .sublime-dependency file in the root of the package as shown above. This should be a text file with a single line that contains a 2 digit number (e.g. 01 or 50). This controls in what order each installed dependency will get added to the sys.path. You'd typically pick a lower number if your dependency has no other dependencies and a higher value if it does (so that it gets injected after those).
Once you have the initial dependency laid out in the correct format in the Packages folder, you would use the command Package Control: Install Local Dependency from the Command Palette, and then select the name of your dependency.
This causes Package Control to "install" the dependency (i.e. update the 0_package_control_loader package) to make the dependency active. This step would normally be taken by Package Control automatically when it installs a dependency for the first time, so if you are also manually distributing your dependency you need to provide instructions to take this step.

how to add precompiled binaries to a python project (cloud-functions python)?

I have to deploy a python function to GCP. The libraries I want to use a library (USD by Pixar specifically) which needs I need to build myself. To make the library accessible I need to make changes to $PATH an $PYTHONPATH.
So the problem is that I have to include everything in one project to deploy the function and I don't know where to start.
I have tried appending to PYTHONPATH on run-time but it gives no module error. Also I have no idea how can I change PATH variable to be able to use executables inside usd/bin folder
import sys
sys.path.append('lib/python') # relative path.

Local collection of Python packages: best way to import them?

I need to ship a collection of Python programs that use multiple packages stored in a local Library directory: the goal is to avoid having users install packages before using my programs (the packages are shipped in the Library directory). What is the best way of importing the packages contained in Library?
I tried three methods, but none of them appears perfect: is there a simpler and robust method? or is one of these methods the best one can do?
In the first method, the Library folder is simply added to the library path:
import sys
import os
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), 'Library'))
import package_from_Library
The Library folder is put at the beginning so that the packages shipped with my programs have priority over the same modules installed by the user (this way I am sure that they have the correct version to work with my programs). This method also works when the Library folder is not in the current directory, which is good. However, this approach has drawbacks. Each and every one of my programs adds a copy of the same path to sys.path, which is a waste. In addition, all programs must contain the same three path-modifying lines, which goes against the Don't Repeat Yourself principle.
An improvement over the above problems consists in trying to add the Library path only once, by doing it in an imported module:
# In module add_Library_path:
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), 'Library'))
and then to use, in each of my programs:
import add_Library_path
import package_from_Library
This way, thanks to the caching mechanism of CPython, the module add_Library_path is only run once, and the Library path is added only once to sys.path. However, a drawback of this approach is that import add_Library_path has an invisible side effect, and that the order of the imports matters: this makes the code less legible, and more fragile. Also, this forces my distribution of programs to inlude an add_Library_path.py program that users will not use.
Python modules from Library can also be imported by making it a package (empty __init__.py file stored inside), which allows one to do:
from Library import module_from_Library
However, this breaks for packages in Library, as they might do something like from xlutils.filter import …, which breaks because xlutils is not found in sys.path. So, this method works, but only when including modules in Library, not packages.
All these methods have some drawback.
Is there a better way of shipping programs with a collection of packages (that they use) stored in a local Library directory? or is one of the methods above (method 1?) the best one can do?
PS: In my case, all the packages from Library are pure Python packages, but a more general solution that works for any operating system is best.
PPS: The goal is that the user be able to use my programs without having to install anything (beyond copying the directory I ship them regularly), like in the examples above.
PPPS: More precisely, the goal is to have the flexibility of easily updating both my collection of programs and their associated third-party packages from Library by having my users do a simple copy of a directory containing my programs and the Library folder of "hidden" third-party packages. (I do frequent updates, so I prefer not forcing the users to update their Python distribution too.)

Messing around with sys.path() leads to pain... The modern package template and Distribute contain a vast array of information and were in part set up to solve your problem.
What I would do is to set up setup.py to install all your packages to a specific site-packages location or if you could do it to the system's site-packages. In the former case, the local site-packages would then be added to the PYTHONPATH of the system/user. In the latter case, nothing needs to changes
You could use the batch file to set the python path as well. Or change the python executable to point to a shell script that contains a modified PYTHONPATH and then executes the python interpreter. The latter of course, means that you have to have access to the user's machine, which you do not. However, if your users only run scripts and do not import your own libraries, you could use your own wrapper for scripts:
#!/path/to/my/python
And the /path/to/my/python script would be something like:
#!/bin/sh
PYTHONPATH=/whatever/lib/path:$PYTHONPATH /usr/bin/python $*

I think you should have a look at path import hooks which allow to modify the behaviour of python when searching for modules.
For example you could try to do something like kde's scriptengine does for python plugins[1].
It adds a special token to sys.path(like "<plasmaXXXXXX>" with XXXXXX being a random number just to avoid name collisions) and then when python try to import modules and can't find them in the other paths, it will call your importer which can deal with it.
A simpler alternative is to have a main script used as launcher which simply adds the path to sys.path and execute the target file(so that you can safely avoid putting the sys.path.append(...) line on every file).
Yet an other alternative, that works on python2.6+, would be to install the library under the per-user site-packages directory.
[1] You can find the source code under /usr/share/kde4/apps/plasma_scriptengine_python in a linux installation with kde.

Python scripts that depend on binaries... how to distribute?

I have a codebase that includes some C++ code and Python scripts that make use of the resulting binaries (via the subprocess module).
root/
experiments/
script_1.py (needs to call binary_1)
clis/
binary_1.cc
binary_1
What's the best way to refer to the binary from the Python scripts?
A relative path from the Python script's directory to the binary, which assumes the user will be running the Python script from a particular directory
Just the binary name, which assumes the user will have added the binary's directory to the $PATH variable, or copied the binary to /usr/local/bin, or something
Something else?

If your binaries are pre-compiled you can use the data_files parameter to setuptools. Have it installed in /usr/local/bin.
data_files=[("/usr/local/bin", glob("bin/*"))], ...

You could use __file__ to find out the location of the Python script, so it wouldn't matter where the user ran the script from.
path = os.path.normpath(os.path.join(
os.path.dirname(__file__), '..', 'clis', 'binary_1'
))

In my experience, the best way to integrate your C(pp) code in your Python program is to make a compiled Python module out of the C(pp) code instead of using the subprocess module as you are now doing.
In addition to a more consistent and readable Python codebase, you get the added benefit of modularity (solving among others the $PATH issues) and can use distutils as build tool. Distribution is also easier, then, as setup.py automates it.

How can I make a Python extension module packaged as an egg loadable without installing it?

I'm in the middle of reworking our build scripts to be based upon the wonderful Waf tool (I did use SCons for ages but its just way too slow).
Anyway, I've hit the following situation and I cannot find a resolution to it:
I have a product that depends on a number of previously built egg files.
I'm trying to package the product using PyInstaller as part of the build process.
I build the dependencies first.
Next I want to run PyInstaller to package the product that depends on the eggs I built. I need PyInstaller to be able to load those egg files as part of it's packaging process.
This sounds easy: you work out what PYTHONPATH should be, construct a copy of sys.environ setting the variable up correctly, and then invoke the PyInstaller script using subprocess.Popen passing the previously configured environment as the env argument.
The problem is that setting PYTHONPATH alone does not seem to be enough if the eggs you are adding are extension modules that are packaged as zipsafe. In this case, it turns out that the embedded libraries are not able to be imported.
If I unzip the eggs (renaming the directories to .egg), I can import them with no further settings but this is not what I want in this case.
I can also get the eggs to import from a subshell by doing the following:
Setting PYTHONPATH to the directory that contains the egg you want to import (not the path of the egg itself)
Loading a python shell and using pkg_resources.require to locate the egg.
Once this has been done, the egg loads as normal. Again, this is not practical because I need to be able to run my python shell in a manner where it is ready to import these eggs from the off.
The dirty option would be to output a wrapper script that took the above actions before calling the real target script but this seems like the wrong thing to do: there must be a better way to do this.

Heh, I think this was my bad. The issue appear to have been that the zipsafe flag in setup.py for the extension package was set to False, which appears to affect your ability to treat it as such at all.
Now that I've set that to True I can import the egg files, simply by adding each one to the PYTHONPATH.
I hope someone else finds this answer useful one day!

Although you have a solution, you could always try "virtualenv" that creates a virtual environment of python where you can install and test Python Packages without messing with the core system python:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/virtualenv