-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Installation of Python 3.8 and Python 3.9 side by side breaks pip version. #62911
Comments
Please take a look at this issue. I think it's related. |
It's not |
Also had this issue. A "keg-only" formula should never overwrite these links. This feels like a bug in the 3.9 formula... |
It is, there's a pull request that fixes it in the timeline here. We just need someone to write a check to make sure it doesn't happen again with the next version. |
This is now fixed. Anyone who is affected should be able to restore the expected state of the symlinks with |
I'm using zsh, so I had to run |
Bug report
What you were trying to do (and why)
We are generating MacOS VMs for CI. We install
[email protected]
formula. Then we install some other tools via brew and those tools bring[email protected]
as dependency to machine.As a result, we have inconsistent python3 and pip3 on machine:
python3
from[email protected]
formulapip3
from[email protected]
formulaIt causes issues because If you install any packages via
pip3 install
, they won't be available viapython3
.See related issues:
Step-by-step reproduction instructions
Repro steps:
brew install [email protected]
brew install [email protected]
python3 --version
andpip3 --version
What happened (include command output)
Actually, we have the following output:
It means that Python3 is used from
[email protected]
formula. Pip3 is used from[email protected]
formula. Those versions are not compatible.If you install any packages via
pip3 install
, they won't be available viapython3
What you expected to happen
I am expecting that
python3
version andpip3
will be consistent.Possible workaround
We have found a workaround for this issue but it definitely looks like an issue with
python
formula that should be fixed:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: