Hello Jim, Sounded like a good idea at first, but now you opened my eyes. I guess I'll stick with the manually added eggs for the tests. Thanks. Friday, April 4, 2008, 3:08:27 PM, you wrote: JF> I wouldn't want anyone doing this who wasn't willing to spend the time JF> becoming fairly familiar with the setuptools APIs. The full set of JF> packages uses is described by the working set, which is available (or JF> obtainable) to the recipe. To include tests of all dependencies, you JF> would include each of the locations from the working set as test JF> directories for the test t runner, being careful to avoid system JF> packages -- unless you want to test all system packages on which you JF> depend too. Even then, you could get into trouble, as individual JF> package tests might not be runnable without additional facilities you JF> don't have. For example, some packages might have test dependencies JF> that you haven't included. There is no standard way of specifying JF> test dependencies for installed distributions. JF> In general, I find implicitly including packages for testing is JF> fraught with peril. -- Best regards, Adam GROSZER mailto:agroszer@gmail.com -- Quote of the day: Only God can make random selections.