Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> added the comment:

> Making sysconfig look at sitecustomize seems like the wrong approach.

I mean, you're literally customizing the site, so having it be done from 
sitecustomize doesn't seem terribly wrong. But I agree, I'd rather see the code 
in sitecustomize poke paths into sysconfig, rather than the other way around.

The problem then would be that -S bypasses the path configuration entirely, 
which is likely going to point at non-existent paths. So yeah, for this case 
you need an override that isn't tied to the site module. Having a 
similar-but-different mechanism in sysconfig seems fine. I have a *slight* 
preference for non-executable code, mostly to avoid the risk of import 
hijacking, but it's only slight.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue43976>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to