## Summary
I noticed that these paths aren't returning the cache information, so if
you install through these paths, we actually don't write `uv_cache.json`
at all. I'm not sure how a user would actually end up here, because
assuming there are no bugs, we don't really ever use this path? The
install plan indexes the cached wheels and marks the wheel as installed,
which means it's typically a mistake if we're asking the
`DistributionDatabase` for a wheel that's already available in the
cache... But I did verify that if I _skip_ the install plan's cache
lookup, we write a wheel without `uv_cache.json`, so this is definitely
more correct.
This allows `PythonDownloadRequest` which is used for parsing general
install key requests to have missing segments, which unblocks requests
like `windows-aarch64` or `cpython-linux` (whereas before those would
require `any-any-windows-aarch64` and `cpython-any-linux` respectively).
We still require strict ordering of segments.
Previously, we only allowed missing segments at the end of the key.
This uses a state machine for parsing, which is quite a bit more
complicated.
I'm a little hesitant about the possibility that this regresses error
messages and the complexity of the implementation, but `uv run -p
aarch64` seems valuable following #13724. The alternative to this would
probably be to make these explicit in various places? e.g., expose
`--python-arch`, `--python-libc`, and `--python-os`? Or make
`--python-platform` (which already exists) accept a subset of the keys?
There is a possibility of regressions here, e.g., if something matches
this parser it will not fallback to the `PythonRequest::ExecutableName`
case and we've made this parser more permissive, but I think that should
be quite rare?
## Summary
Split the cleanup fixes from https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/15196
into a separate PR for easier review.
This cleans up some minor env var usage / references throughout tests
and runtime code.
## Test Plan
Existing Tests. No functional changes.
## Summary
It would be nice if this rendered as
`[tool.uv.extra-build-dependencies]` and `[extra-build-dependencies]`
(in `uv.toml`), but this is at least correct.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/15124.
## Summary
fixes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/15172
This change adds a regex filter to normalize dates in GitHub release
URLs within the `python_install_no_cache` test snapshot.
**Problem:**
The test was hardcoding the date `20250808` in the expected error
message URL:
```console
https://github.com/astral-sh/python-build-standalone/releases/download/20250808/cpython-3.12.[PATCH]-[DATE]-[PLATFORM].tar.gz
```
This creates a maintenance burden as the snapshot would need to be
updated whenever the underlying Python release date changes.
**Solution:**
Added a regex filter `r"releases/download/\d{8}/"` →
`"releases/download/[DATE]/"` to replace any 8-digit date in the GitHub
release URL path with a generic `[DATE]` placeholder.
**Result:**
The test is now resilient to new Python releases and won't require
snapshot updates when the underlying release date changes. The error
message now consistently shows:
```console
https://github.com/astral-sh/python-build-standalone/releases/download/[DATE]/cpython-3.12.[PATCH]-[DATE]-[PLATFORM].tar.gz
```
## Test Plan
`python_install` tests seem to pass ✅
```console
$ cargo test --package uv --test it -- python_install
Compiling uv-cli v0.0.1 (/home/ubaid/projects/uv/crates/uv-cli)
Compiling uv v0.8.8 (/home/ubaid/projects/uv/crates/uv)
Finished `test` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 19.04s
Running tests/it/main.rs (target/debug/deps/it-14d47eb0324a8a0a)
running 30 tests
test python_install::python_install_unknown ... ok
test network::python_install_io_error ... ok
test network::python_install_http_500 ... ok
test python_install::python_install_invalid_request ... ok
test python_install::python_install_broken_link ... ok
test python_install::python_install_preview_no_bin ... ok
test python_install::regression_cpython ... ok
test python_install::uninstall_last_patch ... ok
test python_install::install_no_transparent_upgrade_with_venv_patch_specification ... ok
test python_install::install_lower_patch_automatically ... ok
test python_install::uninstall_highest_patch ... ok
test python_install::install_transparent_patch_upgrade_venv_module ... ok
test python_install::python_install_default_from_env ... ok
test python_install::python_install ... ok
test python_install::python_reinstall_patch ... ok
test python_install::python_install_force ... ok
test python_install::install_transparent_patch_upgrade_uv_venv ... ok
test python_install::install_multiple_patches ... ok
test python_install::python_install_314 ... ok
test python_install::python_install_default ... ok
test python_install::python_install_automatic ... ok
test python_install::python_install_freethreaded ... ok
test python_install::python_install_preview_upgrade ... ok
test python_install::python_install_no_cache ... ok
test python_install::python_install_default_preview ... ok
test python_install::python_install_preview ... ok
test python_install::python_install_minor ... ok
test python_install::python_reinstall ... ok
test python_install::python_install_cached ... ok
test python_install::python_install_multiple_patch ... ok
test result: ok. 30 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 2207 filtered out; finished in 23.34s
```
As described in #15179, there are cases where it can be useful to
reinstall the latest patch on upgrade if it is already installed. Using
this flag, you don't need to know ahead of time if you have the latest
patch already.
Closes#15179.
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
Uses a <3.10-compatible version of `zip` since the `strict` argument was
[added in 3.10](https://docs.python.org/3.10/library/functions.html#zip)
## Test Plan
I executed the `_matching_parents` function in a local 3.9 environment
---------
Co-authored-by: Zanie Blue <contact@zanie.dev>
Automated update for Python releases.
This picks up dynamically-linked tkinter/libtcl/libtk, which fixes#6893
and a host of similar issues.
Co-authored-by: Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@ldpreload.com>
Related to https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/15113
The case in the linked issue is that we perhaps should not be allowing
`uv run --with` with system interpreters at all. I think we can consider
that, but the issue highlighted that `uv run --with` for a system
interpreter is broken if the base interpreter has custom site packages.
This generalizes beyond system interpreters so we should probably fix
our overlays.
A little spicy. We could consider this breaking, but I can't think of
what workflow it'd break and it matches the spirit of `--isolated`. This
was requested by @ssbarnea
Revives https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/9130
Previously, we allowed scoping conflicting extras or groups to specific
packages, e.g. ,`{ package = "foo", extra = "bar" }` for a conflict in
`foo[bar]`. Now, we allow dropping the `extra` or `group` bit and using
`{ package = "foo" }` directly which declares a conflict with `foo`'s
production dependencies.
This means you can declare conflicts between workspace members, e.g.:
```
[tool.uv]
conflicts = [[{ package = "foo" }, { package = "bar" }]]
```
would not allow `foo` and `bar` to be installed at the same time.
Similarly, a conflict can be declared between a package and a group:
```
[tool.uv]
conflicts = [[{ package = "foo" }, { group = "lint" }]]
```
which would mean, e.g., that `--only-group lint` would be required for
the invocation.
As with our existing support for conflicting extras, there are
edge-cases here where the resolver will _not_ fail even if there are
conflicts that render a particular install target unusable. There's test
coverage for some of these. We'll still error at install-time when the
conflicting groups are selected. Due to the likelihood of bugs in this
feature, I've marked it as a preview feature.
I would not recommend reading the commits as there's some slop from not
wanting to rebase Andrew's branch.
---------
Co-authored-by: Andrew Gallant <andrew@astral.sh>
We should definitely not pick up user-level installations unless we
can't find uv anywhere else. Otherwise, e.g., we would find a uv
installed with `pipx install uv` before the one matching the uv module.
We regularly get confusing bug reports where a package sometimes works
and sometimes doesn't and it's not clear to the user why. Ultimately, it
turns out that two packages contain the same module and there is a race
condition when installing the two packages. Usually, it's one of the
opencv-python distributions, but recently it's been z3, too. These error
are completely inscrutable to users.
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/10708
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/11806
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/11659
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/13435
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/13550
* https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/14030
We now warn for top-level modules (pattern: `<identifier>/__init__.py`)
that collide in a single installation, naming the offending wheels.
Checking for `__init__.py` excludes namespace packages.
Test script:
```
uv venv -q && cargo run -q --profile fast-build pip install --no-progress --link-mode clone opencv-python opencv-contrib-python --no-build --no-deps
uv venv -q && cargo run -q --profile fast-build pip install --no-progress --link-mode copy opencv-python opencv-contrib-python --no-build --no-deps
uv venv -q && cargo run -q --profile fast-build pip install --no-progress --link-mode hardlink opencv-python opencv-contrib-python --no-build --no-deps
uv venv -q && cargo run -q --profile fast-build pip install --no-progress --link-mode symlink opencv-python opencv-contrib-python --no-build --no-deps
```
We currently only catch conflicts in a single installation. Should we
prime the lock database with the site-packages contents, and would that
carry overhead?
<!--
Thank you for contributing to uv! To help us out with reviewing, please
consider the following:
- Does this pull request include a summary of the change? (See below.)
- Does this pull request include a descriptive title?
- Does this pull request include references to any relevant issues?
-->
## Summary
<!-- What's the purpose of the change? What does it do, and why? -->
At some places the virtualenv directory was manually removed instead of
using `remove_virtualenv`.
I also adjusted the error type.
#14985
## Test Plan
<!-- How was it tested? -->
Follows https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/14181
Two goals here
- Remove duplicated logic and make the search order clear
- Resolve user confusion around the searched directories; we previously
only displayed the last attempt, which we rarely expect to be relevant
## Summary
uv will now reject ZIP files that meet any of the following conditions:
- Multiple local header entries exist for the same file with different
contents.
- A local header entry exists for a file that isn't included in the
end-of-central directory record.
- An entry exists in the end-of-central directory record that does not
have a corresponding local header.
- The ZIP file contains contents after the first end-of-central
directory record.
- The CRC32 doesn't match between the local file header and the
end-of-central directory record.
- The compressed size doesn't match between the local file header and
the end-of-central directory record.
- The uncompressed size doesn't match between the local file header and
the end-of-central directory record.
- The reported central directory offset (in the end-of-central-directory
header) does not match the actual offset.
- The reported ZIP64 end of central directory locator offset does not
match the actual offset.
We also validate the above for files with data descriptors, which we
previously ignored.
Wheels from the most recent releases of the top 15,000 packages on PyPI
have been confirmed to pass these checks, and PyPI will also reject ZIPs
under many of the same conditions (at upload time) in the future.
In rare cases, this validation can be disabled by setting
`UV_INSECURE_NO_ZIP_VALIDATION=1`. Any validations should be reported to
the uv issue tracker and to the upstream package maintainer.
Previously, publish would always use the default retries, now it
respects `UV_HTTP_RETRIES`
Some awkward error handling to avoid pulling anyhow into uv-publish.
Specifically, support `UV_NO_EDITABLE=1 uv export`. It's now also
supported in `uv add`, though it's default there anyway and the env var
exists only for completeness.
Fixes#15103
Charlie Marsh
github-actions[bot]
Zanie Blue
Ahmed Ilyas
Hood Chatham
samypr100
Ubaid Shaikh
John Mumm
Dustin Ngo
konsti
Michael Šimáček
Lars Grams