How to create Python egg file - python

I have questions about egg files in Python.
I have much Python code organized by package and I'm trying to create egg files.
I'm following instructions, but they are very common.
According to that, it seems I need to have a setup.py file.
Would you please tell me what I need to put into setup.py file and where it should reside?
I suppose it's enough to create setup.py and then start "setup.py bdist_egg" for getting egg file. Could you please confirm?
Is it possible to include only .pyc files into egg file?
Having .egg file how I can just start the code from it without unpacking like java -jar <jar file> does?

You are reading the wrong documentation. You want this: https://setuptools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/setuptools.html#develop-deploy-the-project-source-in-development-mode
Creating setup.py is covered in the distutils documentation in Python's standard library documentation here. The main difference (for python eggs) is you import setup from setuptools, not distutils.
Yep. That should be right.
I don't think so. pyc files can be version and platform dependent. You might be able to open the egg (they should just be zip files) and delete .py files leaving .pyc files, but it wouldn't be recommended.
I'm not sure. That might be “Development Mode”. Or are you looking for some “py2exe” or “py2app” mode?

For #4, the closest thing to starting java with a jar file for your app is a new feature in Python 2.6, executable zip files and directories.
python myapp.zip
Where myapp.zip is a zip containing a __main__.py file which is executed as the script file to be executed. Your package dependencies can also be included in the file:
__main__.py
mypackage/__init__.py
mypackage/someliblibfile.py
You can also execute an egg, but the incantation is not as nice:
# Bourn Shell and derivatives (Linux/OSX/Unix)
PYTHONPATH=myapp.egg python -m myapp
rem Windows
set PYTHONPATH=myapp.egg
python -m myapp
This puts the myapp.egg on the Python path and uses the -m argument to run a module. Your myapp.egg will likely look something like:
myapp/__init__.py
myapp/somelibfile.py
And python will run __init__.py (you should check that __file__=='__main__' in your app for command line use).
Egg files are just zip files so you might be able to add __main__.py to your egg with a zip tool and make it executable in python 2.6 and run it like python myapp.egg instead of the above incantation where the PYTHONPATH environment variable is set.
More information on executable zip files including how to make them directly executable with a shebang can be found on Michael Foord's blog post on the subject.

I think you should use python wheels for distribution instead of egg now.
Wheels are the new standard of python distribution and are intended to
replace eggs. Support is offered in pip >= 1.4 and setuptools >= 0.8.

Related

Is there any specified way for makes a executable from python file? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Create a single executable from a Python project [closed]
(3 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I'm building a Python application and don't want to force my clients to install Python and modules.
So, is there a way to compile a Python script to be a standalone executable?
You can use PyInstaller to package Python programs as standalone executables. It works on Windows, Linux, and Mac.
PyInstaller Quickstart
Install PyInstaller from PyPI:
pip install pyinstaller
Go to your program’s directory and run:
pyinstaller yourprogram.py
This will generate the bundle in a subdirectory called dist.
pyinstaller -F yourprogram.py
Adding -F (or --onefile) parameter will pack everything into single "exe".
pyinstaller -F --paths=<your_path>\Lib\site-packages yourprogram.py
running into "ImportError" you might consider side-packages.
pip install pynput==1.6.8
still runing in Import-Erorr - try to downgrade pyinstaller - see Getting error when using pynput with pyinstaller
For a more detailed walkthrough, see the manual.
You can use py2exe as already answered and use Cython to convert your key .py files in .pyc, C compiled files, like .dll in Windows and .so on Linux.
It is much harder to revert than common .pyo and .pyc files (and also gain in performance!).
You might wish to investigate Nuitka. It takes Python source code and converts it in to C++ API calls. Then it compiles into an executable binary (ELF on Linux). It has been around for a few years now and supports a wide range of Python versions.
You will probably also get a performance improvement if you use it. It is recommended.
Yes, it is possible to compile Python scripts into standalone executables.
PyInstaller can be used to convert Python programs into stand-alone executables, under Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Solaris, and AIX. It is one of the recommended converters.
py2exe converts Python scripts into only executable on the Windows platform.
Cython is a static compiler for both the Python programming language and the extended Cython programming language.
I would like to compile some useful information about creating standalone files on Windows using Python 2.7.
I have used py2exe and it works, but I had some problems.
It has shown some problems for creating single files in Windows 64 bits: Using bundle_files = 1 with py2exe is not working;
It is necessary to create a setup.py file for it to work. http://www.py2exe.org/index.cgi/Tutorial#Step2;
I have had problems with dependencies that you have to solve by importing packages in the setup file;
I was not able to make it work together with PyQt.
This last reason made me try PyInstaller http://www.pyinstaller.org/.
In my opinion, it is much better because:
It is easier to use.
I suggest creating a .bat file with the following lines for example (pyinstaller.exe must be in in the Windows path):
pyinstaller.exe --onefile MyCode.py
You can create a single file, among other options (https://pyinstaller.readthedocs.io/en/stable/usage.html#options).
I had only one problem using PyInstaller and multiprocessing package that was solved by using this recipe: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/wiki/Recipe-Multiprocessing.
So, I think that, at least for python 2.7, a better and simpler option is PyInstaller.
And a third option is cx_Freeze, which is cross-platform.
pyinstaller yourfile.py -F --onefile
This creates a standalone EXE file on Windows.
Important note 1: The EXE file will be generated in a folder named 'dist'.
Important note 2: Do not forget --onefile flag
You can install PyInstaller using pip install PyInstaller
NOTE: In rare cases there are hidden dependencies...so if you run the EXE file and get missing library error (win32timezone in the example below) then use something like this:
pyinstaller --hiddenimport win32timezone -F "Backup Program.py"
I like PyInstaller - especially the "windowed" variant:
pyinstaller --onefile --windowed myscript.py
It will create one single *.exe file in a distination/folder.
You may like py2exe. You'll also find information in there for doing it on Linux.
Use py2exe.... use the below set up files:
from distutils.core import setup
import py2exe
from distutils.filelist import findall
import matplotlib
setup(
console = ['PlotMemInfo.py'],
options = {
'py2exe': {
'packages': ['matplotlib'],
'dll_excludes': ['libgdk-win32-2.0-0.dll',
'libgobject-2.0-0.dll',
'libgdk_pixbuf-2.0-0.dll']
}
},
data_files = matplotlib.get_py2exe_datafiles()
)
I also recommend PyInstaller for better backward compatibility such as Python 2.3 - 2.7.
For py2exe, you have to have Python 2.6.
For Python 3.2 scripts, the only choice is cx_Freeze. Build it from sources; otherwise it won't work.
For Python 2.x I suggest PyInstaller as it can package a Python program in a single executable, unlike cx_Freeze which outputs also libraries.
Since it seems to be missing from the current list of answers, I think it is worth mentioning that the standard library includes a zipapp module that can be used for this purpose. Its basic usage is just compressing a bunch of Python files into a zip file with extension .pyz than can be directly executed as python myapp.pyz, but you can also make a self-contained package from a requirements.txt file:
$ python -m pip install -r requirements.txt --target myapp
$ python -m zipapp -p "interpreter" myapp
Where interpreter can be something like /usr/bin/env python (see Specifying the Interpreter).
Usually, the generated .pyz / .pyzw file should be executable, in Unix because it gets marked as such and in Windows because Python installation usually registers those extensions. However, it is relatively easy to make a Windows executable that should work as long as the user has python3.dll in the path.
If you don't want to require the end user to install Python, you can distribute the application along with the embeddable Python package.
py2exe will make the EXE file you want, but you need to have the same version of MSVCR90.dll on the machine you're going to use your new EXE file.
See Tutorial for more information.
You can find the list of distribution utilities listed at Distribution Utilities.
I use bbfreeze and it has been working very well (yet to have Python 3 support though).
Not exactly a packaging of the Python code, but there is now also Grumpy from Google, which transpiles the code to Go.
It doesn't support the Python C API, so it may not work for all projects.
Using PyInstaller, I found a better method using shortcut to the .exe rather than making --onefile. Anyway, there are probably some data files around and if you're running a site-based app then your program depends on HTML, JavaScript, and CSS files too. There isn't any point in moving all these files somewhere... Instead what if we move the working path up?
Make a shortcut to the EXE file, move it at top and set the target and start-in paths as specified, to have relative paths going to dist\folder:
Target: %windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\web_wrapper.exe
Start in: "%windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\"
We can rename the shortcut to anything, so renaming to "GTFS-Manager".
Now when I double-click the shortcut, it's as if I python-ran the file! I found this approach better than the --onefile one as:
In onefile's case, there's a problem with a .dll missing for the Windows 7 OS which needs some prior installation, etc. Yawn. With the usual build with multiple files, no such issues.
All the files that my Python script uses (it's deploying a tornado web server and needs a whole freakin' website worth of files to be there!) don't need to be moved anywhere: I simply create the shortcut at top.
I can actually use this exact same folder on Ubuntu (run python3 myfile.py) and Windows (double-click the shortcut).
I don't need to bother with the overly complicated hacking of .spec file to include data files, etc.
Oh, remember to delete off the build folder after building. It will save on size.
Use Cython to convert to C, compile, and link with GCC.
Another could be, make the core functions in C (the ones you want to make hard to reverse), compile them and use Boost.Python to import the compiled code (plus you get a much faster code execution). Then use any tool mentioned to distribute.
I'm told that PyRun is also an option. It currently supports Linux, FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

Run python .exe on any computer [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Create a single executable from a Python project [closed]
(3 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I'm building a Python application and don't want to force my clients to install Python and modules.
So, is there a way to compile a Python script to be a standalone executable?
You can use PyInstaller to package Python programs as standalone executables. It works on Windows, Linux, and Mac.
PyInstaller Quickstart
Install PyInstaller from PyPI:
pip install pyinstaller
Go to your program’s directory and run:
pyinstaller yourprogram.py
This will generate the bundle in a subdirectory called dist.
pyinstaller -F yourprogram.py
Adding -F (or --onefile) parameter will pack everything into single "exe".
pyinstaller -F --paths=<your_path>\Lib\site-packages yourprogram.py
running into "ImportError" you might consider side-packages.
pip install pynput==1.6.8
still runing in Import-Erorr - try to downgrade pyinstaller - see Getting error when using pynput with pyinstaller
For a more detailed walkthrough, see the manual.
You can use py2exe as already answered and use Cython to convert your key .py files in .pyc, C compiled files, like .dll in Windows and .so on Linux.
It is much harder to revert than common .pyo and .pyc files (and also gain in performance!).
You might wish to investigate Nuitka. It takes Python source code and converts it in to C++ API calls. Then it compiles into an executable binary (ELF on Linux). It has been around for a few years now and supports a wide range of Python versions.
You will probably also get a performance improvement if you use it. It is recommended.
Yes, it is possible to compile Python scripts into standalone executables.
PyInstaller can be used to convert Python programs into stand-alone executables, under Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Solaris, and AIX. It is one of the recommended converters.
py2exe converts Python scripts into only executable on the Windows platform.
Cython is a static compiler for both the Python programming language and the extended Cython programming language.
I would like to compile some useful information about creating standalone files on Windows using Python 2.7.
I have used py2exe and it works, but I had some problems.
It has shown some problems for creating single files in Windows 64 bits: Using bundle_files = 1 with py2exe is not working;
It is necessary to create a setup.py file for it to work. http://www.py2exe.org/index.cgi/Tutorial#Step2;
I have had problems with dependencies that you have to solve by importing packages in the setup file;
I was not able to make it work together with PyQt.
This last reason made me try PyInstaller http://www.pyinstaller.org/.
In my opinion, it is much better because:
It is easier to use.
I suggest creating a .bat file with the following lines for example (pyinstaller.exe must be in in the Windows path):
pyinstaller.exe --onefile MyCode.py
You can create a single file, among other options (https://pyinstaller.readthedocs.io/en/stable/usage.html#options).
I had only one problem using PyInstaller and multiprocessing package that was solved by using this recipe: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/wiki/Recipe-Multiprocessing.
So, I think that, at least for python 2.7, a better and simpler option is PyInstaller.
And a third option is cx_Freeze, which is cross-platform.
pyinstaller yourfile.py -F --onefile
This creates a standalone EXE file on Windows.
Important note 1: The EXE file will be generated in a folder named 'dist'.
Important note 2: Do not forget --onefile flag
You can install PyInstaller using pip install PyInstaller
NOTE: In rare cases there are hidden dependencies...so if you run the EXE file and get missing library error (win32timezone in the example below) then use something like this:
pyinstaller --hiddenimport win32timezone -F "Backup Program.py"
I like PyInstaller - especially the "windowed" variant:
pyinstaller --onefile --windowed myscript.py
It will create one single *.exe file in a distination/folder.
You may like py2exe. You'll also find information in there for doing it on Linux.
Use py2exe.... use the below set up files:
from distutils.core import setup
import py2exe
from distutils.filelist import findall
import matplotlib
setup(
console = ['PlotMemInfo.py'],
options = {
'py2exe': {
'packages': ['matplotlib'],
'dll_excludes': ['libgdk-win32-2.0-0.dll',
'libgobject-2.0-0.dll',
'libgdk_pixbuf-2.0-0.dll']
}
},
data_files = matplotlib.get_py2exe_datafiles()
)
I also recommend PyInstaller for better backward compatibility such as Python 2.3 - 2.7.
For py2exe, you have to have Python 2.6.
For Python 3.2 scripts, the only choice is cx_Freeze. Build it from sources; otherwise it won't work.
For Python 2.x I suggest PyInstaller as it can package a Python program in a single executable, unlike cx_Freeze which outputs also libraries.
Since it seems to be missing from the current list of answers, I think it is worth mentioning that the standard library includes a zipapp module that can be used for this purpose. Its basic usage is just compressing a bunch of Python files into a zip file with extension .pyz than can be directly executed as python myapp.pyz, but you can also make a self-contained package from a requirements.txt file:
$ python -m pip install -r requirements.txt --target myapp
$ python -m zipapp -p "interpreter" myapp
Where interpreter can be something like /usr/bin/env python (see Specifying the Interpreter).
Usually, the generated .pyz / .pyzw file should be executable, in Unix because it gets marked as such and in Windows because Python installation usually registers those extensions. However, it is relatively easy to make a Windows executable that should work as long as the user has python3.dll in the path.
If you don't want to require the end user to install Python, you can distribute the application along with the embeddable Python package.
py2exe will make the EXE file you want, but you need to have the same version of MSVCR90.dll on the machine you're going to use your new EXE file.
See Tutorial for more information.
You can find the list of distribution utilities listed at Distribution Utilities.
I use bbfreeze and it has been working very well (yet to have Python 3 support though).
Not exactly a packaging of the Python code, but there is now also Grumpy from Google, which transpiles the code to Go.
It doesn't support the Python C API, so it may not work for all projects.
Using PyInstaller, I found a better method using shortcut to the .exe rather than making --onefile. Anyway, there are probably some data files around and if you're running a site-based app then your program depends on HTML, JavaScript, and CSS files too. There isn't any point in moving all these files somewhere... Instead what if we move the working path up?
Make a shortcut to the EXE file, move it at top and set the target and start-in paths as specified, to have relative paths going to dist\folder:
Target: %windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\web_wrapper.exe
Start in: "%windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\"
We can rename the shortcut to anything, so renaming to "GTFS-Manager".
Now when I double-click the shortcut, it's as if I python-ran the file! I found this approach better than the --onefile one as:
In onefile's case, there's a problem with a .dll missing for the Windows 7 OS which needs some prior installation, etc. Yawn. With the usual build with multiple files, no such issues.
All the files that my Python script uses (it's deploying a tornado web server and needs a whole freakin' website worth of files to be there!) don't need to be moved anywhere: I simply create the shortcut at top.
I can actually use this exact same folder on Ubuntu (run python3 myfile.py) and Windows (double-click the shortcut).
I don't need to bother with the overly complicated hacking of .spec file to include data files, etc.
Oh, remember to delete off the build folder after building. It will save on size.
Use Cython to convert to C, compile, and link with GCC.
Another could be, make the core functions in C (the ones you want to make hard to reverse), compile them and use Boost.Python to import the compiled code (plus you get a much faster code execution). Then use any tool mentioned to distribute.
I'm told that PyRun is also an option. It currently supports Linux, FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

How to Destribute python and openCV based tool as single setup file with all the dependencies [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Create a single executable from a Python project [closed]
(3 answers)
Closed 1 year ago.
I'm building a Python application and don't want to force my clients to install Python and modules.
So, is there a way to compile a Python script to be a standalone executable?
You can use PyInstaller to package Python programs as standalone executables. It works on Windows, Linux, and Mac.
PyInstaller Quickstart
Install PyInstaller from PyPI:
pip install pyinstaller
Go to your program’s directory and run:
pyinstaller yourprogram.py
This will generate the bundle in a subdirectory called dist.
pyinstaller -F yourprogram.py
Adding -F (or --onefile) parameter will pack everything into single "exe".
pyinstaller -F --paths=<your_path>\Lib\site-packages yourprogram.py
running into "ImportError" you might consider side-packages.
pip install pynput==1.6.8
still runing in Import-Erorr - try to downgrade pyinstaller - see Getting error when using pynput with pyinstaller
For a more detailed walkthrough, see the manual.
You can use py2exe as already answered and use Cython to convert your key .py files in .pyc, C compiled files, like .dll in Windows and .so on Linux.
It is much harder to revert than common .pyo and .pyc files (and also gain in performance!).
You might wish to investigate Nuitka. It takes Python source code and converts it in to C++ API calls. Then it compiles into an executable binary (ELF on Linux). It has been around for a few years now and supports a wide range of Python versions.
You will probably also get a performance improvement if you use it. It is recommended.
Yes, it is possible to compile Python scripts into standalone executables.
PyInstaller can be used to convert Python programs into stand-alone executables, under Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Solaris, and AIX. It is one of the recommended converters.
py2exe converts Python scripts into only executable on the Windows platform.
Cython is a static compiler for both the Python programming language and the extended Cython programming language.
I would like to compile some useful information about creating standalone files on Windows using Python 2.7.
I have used py2exe and it works, but I had some problems.
It has shown some problems for creating single files in Windows 64 bits: Using bundle_files = 1 with py2exe is not working;
It is necessary to create a setup.py file for it to work. http://www.py2exe.org/index.cgi/Tutorial#Step2;
I have had problems with dependencies that you have to solve by importing packages in the setup file;
I was not able to make it work together with PyQt.
This last reason made me try PyInstaller http://www.pyinstaller.org/.
In my opinion, it is much better because:
It is easier to use.
I suggest creating a .bat file with the following lines for example (pyinstaller.exe must be in in the Windows path):
pyinstaller.exe --onefile MyCode.py
You can create a single file, among other options (https://pyinstaller.readthedocs.io/en/stable/usage.html#options).
I had only one problem using PyInstaller and multiprocessing package that was solved by using this recipe: https://github.com/pyinstaller/pyinstaller/wiki/Recipe-Multiprocessing.
So, I think that, at least for python 2.7, a better and simpler option is PyInstaller.
And a third option is cx_Freeze, which is cross-platform.
pyinstaller yourfile.py -F --onefile
This creates a standalone EXE file on Windows.
Important note 1: The EXE file will be generated in a folder named 'dist'.
Important note 2: Do not forget --onefile flag
You can install PyInstaller using pip install PyInstaller
NOTE: In rare cases there are hidden dependencies...so if you run the EXE file and get missing library error (win32timezone in the example below) then use something like this:
pyinstaller --hiddenimport win32timezone -F "Backup Program.py"
I like PyInstaller - especially the "windowed" variant:
pyinstaller --onefile --windowed myscript.py
It will create one single *.exe file in a distination/folder.
You may like py2exe. You'll also find information in there for doing it on Linux.
Use py2exe.... use the below set up files:
from distutils.core import setup
import py2exe
from distutils.filelist import findall
import matplotlib
setup(
console = ['PlotMemInfo.py'],
options = {
'py2exe': {
'packages': ['matplotlib'],
'dll_excludes': ['libgdk-win32-2.0-0.dll',
'libgobject-2.0-0.dll',
'libgdk_pixbuf-2.0-0.dll']
}
},
data_files = matplotlib.get_py2exe_datafiles()
)
I also recommend PyInstaller for better backward compatibility such as Python 2.3 - 2.7.
For py2exe, you have to have Python 2.6.
For Python 3.2 scripts, the only choice is cx_Freeze. Build it from sources; otherwise it won't work.
For Python 2.x I suggest PyInstaller as it can package a Python program in a single executable, unlike cx_Freeze which outputs also libraries.
Since it seems to be missing from the current list of answers, I think it is worth mentioning that the standard library includes a zipapp module that can be used for this purpose. Its basic usage is just compressing a bunch of Python files into a zip file with extension .pyz than can be directly executed as python myapp.pyz, but you can also make a self-contained package from a requirements.txt file:
$ python -m pip install -r requirements.txt --target myapp
$ python -m zipapp -p "interpreter" myapp
Where interpreter can be something like /usr/bin/env python (see Specifying the Interpreter).
Usually, the generated .pyz / .pyzw file should be executable, in Unix because it gets marked as such and in Windows because Python installation usually registers those extensions. However, it is relatively easy to make a Windows executable that should work as long as the user has python3.dll in the path.
If you don't want to require the end user to install Python, you can distribute the application along with the embeddable Python package.
py2exe will make the EXE file you want, but you need to have the same version of MSVCR90.dll on the machine you're going to use your new EXE file.
See Tutorial for more information.
You can find the list of distribution utilities listed at Distribution Utilities.
I use bbfreeze and it has been working very well (yet to have Python 3 support though).
Not exactly a packaging of the Python code, but there is now also Grumpy from Google, which transpiles the code to Go.
It doesn't support the Python C API, so it may not work for all projects.
Using PyInstaller, I found a better method using shortcut to the .exe rather than making --onefile. Anyway, there are probably some data files around and if you're running a site-based app then your program depends on HTML, JavaScript, and CSS files too. There isn't any point in moving all these files somewhere... Instead what if we move the working path up?
Make a shortcut to the EXE file, move it at top and set the target and start-in paths as specified, to have relative paths going to dist\folder:
Target: %windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\web_wrapper.exe
Start in: "%windir%\system32\cmd.exe /c start dist\web_wrapper\"
We can rename the shortcut to anything, so renaming to "GTFS-Manager".
Now when I double-click the shortcut, it's as if I python-ran the file! I found this approach better than the --onefile one as:
In onefile's case, there's a problem with a .dll missing for the Windows 7 OS which needs some prior installation, etc. Yawn. With the usual build with multiple files, no such issues.
All the files that my Python script uses (it's deploying a tornado web server and needs a whole freakin' website worth of files to be there!) don't need to be moved anywhere: I simply create the shortcut at top.
I can actually use this exact same folder on Ubuntu (run python3 myfile.py) and Windows (double-click the shortcut).
I don't need to bother with the overly complicated hacking of .spec file to include data files, etc.
Oh, remember to delete off the build folder after building. It will save on size.
Use Cython to convert to C, compile, and link with GCC.
Another could be, make the core functions in C (the ones you want to make hard to reverse), compile them and use Boost.Python to import the compiled code (plus you get a much faster code execution). Then use any tool mentioned to distribute.
I'm told that PyRun is also an option. It currently supports Linux, FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

What is the python equivalent to a Java .jar file?

Java has the concept of packaging all of the code into a file called a Jar file. Does Python have an equivalent idea? If so, what is it? How do I package the files?
Python doesn't have any exact equivalent to a .jar file.
There are many differences, and without knowing exactly what you want to do, it's hard to explain how to do it. But the Python Packaging User Guide does a pretty good job of explaining just about everything relevant.
Here are some of the major differences.
A .jar file is a compiled collection of classes that can be dropped into your application, or installed anywhere on your CLASSPATH.
In Python:
A .py (or .pyc) module can be dropped into your application, or installed anywhere on your sys.path, and it can be imported and used.
A directory full of modules can be treated the same way; it becomes a package (or, if it doesn't contain an __init__.py, it merges with other directories of the same name elsewhere on sys.path into a single package).
A .zip archive containing any number of modules and packages can be stored anywhere, and its path added to your sys.path (e.g., at runtime or via PYTHONPATH) and all of its contents become importable.
Most commonly, you want things to be installed into a system, user, or virtualenv site-packages directory. The recommended way to do that is to create a pip-compatible package distribution; people then install it (and possibly automatically download it from PyPI or a private repo) via pip.
pip does a lot more than that, however. It also allows you to manage dependencies between packages. So ideally, instead of listing a bunch of prereqs that someone has to go download and install manually, you just make them dependencies, and someone just has to pip install your-library. And it keeps track of the state of your site-packages, so you can uninstall or upgrade a package without having to track down the specific files.
Meanwhile, in Java, most .jar files are cross-platform; build once, run anywhere. A few packages have JNI native code and can't be used this way, but it's not the norm.
In Python, many packages have C extensions that have to be compiled for each platform, and even pure-Python packages often need to do some install-time configuration. And meanwhile, "compiling" pure Python doesn't do anything that can't be done just as well at runtime. So in Python, you generally distribute source packages, not compiled packages.
However, .wheel is a binary package format. You can pip wheel to build binary packages for different targets from the source package; then, if someone tries to pip install your package, if there's a wheel for his system, that will be downloaded and installed.
Easy Install from setup_tools defines the .egg format for deploying Python libraries or applications. While similar to JAR, it is nowhere spread as universally as JARs in Java world. Many people just deploy the .py files.
A newer format, intended to supersede eggs, is wheel.
Though it's not a perfect susbstitute of jar due to portability issues, I would add the "auto-extracting" archive way.
One possibility is "makeself": https://makeself.io/
But if you don't need to package external files, and if you like KISS approach, the following is a nice and clean alternative:
The following is taken from Asim Jalis's website.
How to deploy a Python application as a zip file
Create a file __main__.py containing:
print "Hello world from Python"
Zip up the Python files (in this case just this one file) into app.zip by typing:
zip app.zip *
The next step adds a shebang to the zip file and saves it as app—at this point the file app is a zip file containing all your Python sources.
echo '#!/usr/bin/env python' | cat - app.zip > app
chmod 755 app
That’s it. The file app is now have a zipped Python application that is ready to deploy as a single file.
You can run app either using a Python interpreter as:
python app
Or you can run it directly from the command line:
./app
Reference: https://gist.github.com/asimjalis/4237534

Is there a way to embed dependencies within a python script?

I have a simple script that has a dependency on dnspython for parsing zone files. I would like to distribute this script as a single .py that users can run just so long as they have 2.6/2.7 installed. I don't want to have the user install dependencies site-wide as there might be conflicts with existing packages/versions, nor do I want them to muck around with virtualenv. I was wondering if there was a way to embed a package like dnspython inside the script (gzip/base64) and have that script access that package at runtime. Perhaps unpack it into a dir in /tmp and add that to sys.path? I'm not concerned about startup overhead, I just want a single .py w/ all dependencies included that I can distribute.
Also, there would be no C dependencies to build, only pure python packages.
Edit: The script doesn't have to be a .py. Just so long as it is a single executable file.
You can package multiple Python files up into a .egg. Egg files are essentially just zip archives with well defined metadata - look at the setuptools documentation to see how to do this. Per the docs you can make egg files directly executable by specifying the entry point. This would give you a single executable file that can contain your code + any other dependencies.
EDIT: Nowadays I would recommend building a pex to do this. pex is basically an executable zip file with non stdlib dependencies. It doesn't contain a python distribution (like py2app/py2exe) but holds everything else and can be built with a single command line invocation. https://pex.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
The simplest way is just to put your python script named __main__.py with pure Python dependencies in a zip archive, example.
Otherwise PyInstaller could be used to produce a stand-alone executable.
please don't do this. If you do DO NOT make a habit of it.
pydns is BDS licensed but if you try to "embed" a gpl module in this way you could get in trouble
you can learn to use setuptools and you will be much happier in the long run
setuptools will handle the install of dependencies you identified (I'm not sure if the pydns you are using is pure python so you might create problems for your users if you try to add it yourself without knowing their environment)
you can set a url or pypi so that people could upgrade your script with easy_install -U

Categories