uv is designed as a drop-in replacement for common pip
and pip-tools
workflows.
Informally, the intent is such that existing pip
and pip-tools
users can switch to uv without
making meaningful changes to their packaging workflows; and, in most cases, swapping out
pip install
for uv pip install
should "just work".
However, uv is not intended to be an exact clone of pip
, and the further you stray from
common pip
workflows, the more likely you are to encounter differences in behavior. In some cases,
those differences may be known and intentional; in others, they may be the result of implementation
details; and in others, they may be bugs.
This document outlines the known differences between uv and pip
, along with rationale,
workarounds, and a statement of intent for compatibility in the future.
uv does not read configuration files or environment variables that are specific to pip
, like
pip.conf
or PIP_INDEX_URL
.
Reading configuration files and environment variables intended for other tools has a number of drawbacks:
- It requires bug-for-bug compatibility with the target tool, since users end up relying on bugs in the format, the parser, etc.
- If the target tool changes the format in some way, uv is then locked-in to changing it in equivalent ways.
- If that configuration is versioned in some way, uv would need to know which version of the target tool the user is expecting to use.
- It prevents uv from introducing any settings or configuration that don't exist in the target
tool, since otherwise
pip.conf
(or similar) would no longer be usable withpip
. - It can lead user confusion, since uv would be reading settings that don't actually affect its behavior, and many users may not expect uv to read configuration files intended for other tools.
Instead, uv supports its own environment variables, like UV_INDEX_URL
. In the future, uv will
also support persistent configuration in its own configuration file format (e.g., pyproject.toml
or uv.toml
or similar). For more, see #651.
While uv does support direct URL dependencies (e.g., black @ https://...
), it does not support
nested (or "transitive") direct URL dependencies, instead requiring that any direct URL dependencies
are declared upfront.
For example, if black @ https://...
itself had a dependency on toml @ https://...
, uv would
reject the transitive direct URL dependency on toml
and require that toml
be declared as a
dependency in the pyproject.toml
file, like:
# pyproject.toml
dependencies = [
"black @ https://...",
"toml @ https://...",
]
This is a deliberate choice to avoid the correctness and security issues associated with allowing transitive dependencies to introduce arbitrary URLs into the dependency graph.
For example:
- Your package depends on
package_a==1.0.0
. - Your package depends on
package_b==1.0.0
. package_b==1.0.0
depends onpackage_a @ https://...
.
If package_a @ https://...
happens to resolve to version 1.0.0
, pip
would install package_a
from the direct URL. This is a security issue, since the direct URL could be controlled by an
attacker, and a correctness issue, since the direct URL could resolve to an entirely different
package with the same name and version.
In the future, uv may allow transitive URL dependencies in some form (e.g., with user opt-in). For more, see #1808.
By default, uv will accept pre-release versions during dependency resolution in two cases:
- If the package is a direct dependency, and its version markers include a pre-release specifier
(e.g.,
flask>=2.0.0rc1
). - If all published versions of a package are pre-releases.
If dependency resolution fails due to a transitive pre-release, uv will prompt the user to
re-run with --prerelease=allow
, to allow pre-releases for all dependencies.
Alternatively, you can add the transitive dependency to your requirements.in
file with
pre-release specifier (e.g., flask>=2.0.0rc1
) to opt in to pre-release support for that specific
dependency.
In sum, uv needs to know upfront whether the resolver should accept pre-releases for a given
package. pip
, meanwhile, may respect pre-release identifiers in transitive dependencies
depending on the order in which the resolver encounters the relevant specifiers (#1641).
Pre-releases are notoriously difficult
to model, and are a frequent source of bugs in packaging tools. Even pip
, which is viewed as a
reference implementation, has a number of open questions around pre-release handling (#12469,
#12470, #40505, etc.).
uv's pre-release handling is intentionally limited and intentionally requires user opt-in for
pre-releases, to ensure correctness.
In the future, uv may support pre-release identifiers in transitive dependencies. However, it's likely contingent on evolution in the Python packaging specifications. The existing PEPs do not cover "dependency resolution" and are instead focused on behavior for a single version specifier. As such, there are unresolved questions around the correct and intended behavior for pre-releases in the packaging ecosystem more broadly.
uv does not implement spec-compliant handling of local version identifiers (e.g., 1.2.3+local
).
This is considered a known limitation. Although local version identifiers are rare in published
packages (and, e.g., disallowed on PyPI), they're common in the PyTorch ecosystem, and uv's approach
to local versions does support typical PyTorch workflows to succeed out-of-the-box.
PEP 440 specifies that the local version
segment should typically be ignored when evaluating version specifiers, with a few exceptions.
For example, foo==1.2.3
should accept 1.2.3+local
, but foo==1.2.3+local
should not accept
1.2.3
. These asymmetries are hard to model in a resolution algorithm. As such, uv treats 1.2.3
and 1.2.3+local
as entirely separate versions, but respects local versions provided as direct
dependencies throughout the resolution, such that if you provide foo==1.2.3+local
as a direct
dependency, 1.2.3+local
will be accepted for any transitive dependencies that request
foo==1.2.3
.
To take an example from the PyTorch ecosystem, it's common to specify torch==2.0.0+cu118
and
torchvision==0.15.1+cu118
as direct dependencies. torchvision @ 0.15.1+cu118
declares a
dependency on torch==2.0.0
. In this case, uv would recognize that torch==2.0.0+cu118
satisfies
the specifier, since it was provided as a direct dependency.
As compared to pip, the main differences in observed behavior are as follows:
- In general, local versions must be provided as direct dependencies. Resolution may succeed for transitive dependencies that request a non-local version, but this is not guaranteed.
- If only local versions exist for a package
foo
at a given version (e.g.,1.2.3+local
exists, but1.2.3
does not),uv pip install foo==1.2.3
will fail, whilepip install foo==1.2.3
will resolve to an arbitrary local version.
In both uv and pip
, users can specify multiple package indexes from which to search for
the available versions of a given package. However, uv and pip
differ in how they handle
packages that exist on multiple indexes.
For example, imagine that a company publishes an internal version of requests
on a private index
(--extra-index-url
), but also allow installing packages from PyPI by default. In this case, the
private requests
would conflict with the public requests
on PyPI.
When uv searches for a package across multiple indexes, it will iterate over the indexes in order
(preferring the --extra-index-url
over the default index), and stop searching as soon as it
finds a match. This means that if a package exists on multiple indexes, uv will limit its
candidate versions to those present in the first index that contains the package.
pip
, meanwhile, will combine the candidate versions from all indexes, and select the best
version from the combined set., though it makes no guarantees around the order
in which it searches indexes, and expects that packages are unique up to name and version, even
across indexes.
uv's behavior is such that if a package exists on an internal index, it should always be installed
from the internal index, and never from PyPI. The intent is to prevent "dependency confusion"
attacks, in which an attacker publishes a malicious package on PyPI with the same name as an
internal package, thus causing the malicious package to be installed instead of the internal
package. See, for example, the torchtriton
attack
from December 2022.
In the future, uv will support pinning packages to dedicated indexes (see: #171). Additionally, PEP 708 is a provisional standard that aims to address the "dependency confusion" issue across package registries and installers.
uv pip install
and uv pip sync
are designed to work with virtual environments by default.
Specifically, uv will always install packages into the currently active virtual environment, or
search for a virtual environment named .venv
in the current directory or any parent directory
(even if it is not activated).
This differs from pip
, which will install packages into a global environment if no virtual
environment is active, and will not search for inactive virtual environments.
In uv, you can install into non-virtual environments by providing a path to a Python executable
via the --python /path/to/python
option, or via the --system
flag, which installs into the
first Python interpreter found on the PATH
, like pip
.
In other words, uv inverts the default, requiring explicit opt-in to installing into the system Python, which can lead to breakages and other complications, and should only be done in limited circumstances.
For more, see "Installing into arbitrary Python environments".
For a given set of dependency specifiers, it's often the case that there is no single "correct" set of packages to install. Instead, there are many valid sets of packages that satisfy the specifiers.
Neither pip
nor uv make any guarantees about the exact set of packages that will be
installed; only that the resolution will be consistent, deterministic, and compliant with the
specifiers. As such, in some cases, pip
and uv will yield different resolutions; however, both
resolutions should be equally valid.
For example, consider:
# requirements.txt
starlette
fastapi
At time of writing, the most recent starlette
version is 0.37.2
, and the most recent fastapi
version is 0.110.0
. However, fastapi==0.110.0
also depends on starlette
, and introduces an
upper bound: starlette>=0.36.3,<0.37.0
.
If a resolver prioritizes including the most recent version of starlette
, it would need to use
an older version of fastapi
that excludes the upper bound on starlette
. In practice, this
requires falling back to fastapi==0.1.17
:
# This file was autogenerated by uv via the following command:
# uv pip compile -
annotated-types==0.6.0
# via pydantic
anyio==4.3.0
# via starlette
fastapi==0.1.17
idna==3.6
# via anyio
pydantic==2.6.3
# via fastapi
pydantic-core==2.16.3
# via pydantic
sniffio==1.3.1
# via anyio
starlette==0.37.2
# via fastapi
typing-extensions==4.10.0
# via
# pydantic
# pydantic-core
Alternatively, if a resolver prioritizes including the most recent version of fastapi
, it would
need to use an older version of starlette
that satisfies the upper bound. In practice, this
requires falling back to starlette==0.36.3
:
# uv pip compile -
annotated-types==0.6.0
# via pydantic
anyio==4.3.0
# via starlette
fastapi==0.110.0
idna==3.6
# via anyio
pydantic==2.6.3
# via fastapi
pydantic-core==2.16.3
# via pydantic
sniffio==1.3.1
# via anyio
starlette==0.36.3
# via fastapi
typing-extensions==4.10.0
# via
# fastapi
# pydantic
# pydantic-core
When uv resolutions differ from pip
in undesirable ways, it's often a sign that the specifiers
are too loose, and that the user should consider tightening them. For example, in the case of
starlette
and fastapi
, the user could require fastapi>=0.110.0
.
While uv will include hashes via uv pip compile --generate-hashes
, it does not support
hash-checking mode, which is a feature of pip
that allows users to verify the integrity of
downloaded packages by checking their hashes against those provided in the requirements.txt
file.
In the future, uv will support hash-checking mode. For more, see #474.
At present, uv pip check
will surface the following diagnostics:
- A package has no
METADATA
file, or theMETADATA
file can't be parsed. - A package has a
Requires-Python
that doesn't match the Python version of the running interpreter. - A package has a dependency on a package that isn't installed.
- A package has a dependency on a package that's installed, but at an incompatible version.
- Multiple versions of a package are installed in the virtual environment.
In some cases, uv pip check
will surface diagnostics that pip check
does not, and vice versa.
For example, unlike uv pip check
, pip check
will not warn when multiple versions of a package
are installed in the current environment.
uv tends to be stricter than pip
, and will often reject packages that pip
would install.
For example, uv omits packages with invalid version specifiers in its metadata, which pip
similarly plans to exclude in a future release.
In some cases, uv implements lenient behavior for popular packages that are known to have specific spec compliance issues.
If uv rejects a package that pip
would install due to a spec violation, the best course of
action is to first attempt to install a newer version of the package; and, if that fails, to report
the issue to the package maintainer.
uv does not support the complete set of pip
's command-line options and subcommands, although it
does support a large subset.
Missing options and subcommands are prioritized based on user demand and the complexity of the implementation, and tend to be tracked in individual issues. For example:
If you encounter a missing option or subcommand, please search the issue tracker to see if it has already been reported, and if not, consider opening a new issue. Feel free to upvote any existing issues to convey your interest.
uv does not support pip
's auto
or import
options for --keyring-provider
. At present, only
the subproces
option is supported.
Unlike pip
, uv does not enable keyring authentication by default.
Unlike pip
, uv does not wait until a request returns a HTTP 401 before searching for
authentication. uv attaches authentication to all requests for hosts with credentials available.
uv does not support features that are considered legacy or deprecated in pip
. For example,
uv does not support .egg
-style distributions.
uv does not plan to support features that the pip
maintainers explicitly recommend against,
like --target
.