Is this expected? Is there a way to install a python package this way? I can't seem to find one.
There is no way to do an idempotence check on such a thing (at least not easily) since Chef can't know what version of that package is installed currently. It could potentially be improved with either a manual package name attr or an understanding of the #egg= tagging, but any such fixes would go in the pip install provider since no one should be using easy_install anymore
I had to use easy_install for a client who has eggs but not .tar.gz's for
some dependencies. Apparently PIP doesn't support eggs. I simply wrote an
execute resource to handle this, wasn't aware that there was an
easy_install_provider.
It looks like your syntax may be wrong, but I can't definitively find the
syntax you should be using. It's probably some variation of:
I think there was some progress on the idempotence problem [1] that Joe
Williams did for 0.9.14. If you're using something less than that version,
you may want to upgrade.
Is this expected? Is there a way to install a python package this way? I
can't seem to find one.
There is no way to do an idempotence check on such a thing (at least not
easily) since Chef can't know what version of that package is installed
currently. It could potentially be improved with either a manual package
name attr or an understanding of the #egg= tagging, but any such fixes would
go in the pip install provider since no one should be using easy_install
anymore