Pipenv: sys_platform = "== 'win32'" no longer works

[VonAncken]

Issue description

We are building our project for different platforms, but we have modules that should only be installed on certain platforms. So far we have used the following notation:

sys_platform = "== 'win32'"

This worked fine with release 2018.11.26, but not with release 2020.5.28 anymore.

Expected result

A module with the limitation for a certain platform should not be installed on all other platforms.

Actual result

The limitation for a certain platform is ignored.

Steps to replicate

Write a module with the restriction for a specific platform in the notation sys_platform = "== 'win32'" into a pipfile and install pipfile.

[techalchemy]

Please fill out the entire bug report including your Pipfile where you are having this issue. I cannot reproduce this issue locally.

To confirm, this is not specified in the report, but this is about using this syntax in a Pipfile, correct?

[dhendry]

I think I am also having this issue with sys_platform = "== 'Linux'".

Here is a Pipfile which works on pipenv==2018.11.26 but fails with pipenv==2020.6.2:

[[source]]
name = "pypi"
url = "https://pypi.org/simple"
verify_ssl = true

[packages]
google-python-cloud-debugger = {version = "*",sys_platform = "== 'Linux'"}

[dev-packages]

[requires]
python_version = "3.7"

Output:

pipenv lock
Locking [dev-packages] dependencies…
Locking [packages] dependencies…
Building requirements...
Resolving dependencies...
✘ Locking Failed! 
Ignoring error when setting locale: unsupported locale setting
Ignoring error when setting locale: unsupported locale setting
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/resolver.py", line 807, in <module>
    main()
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/resolver.py", line 803, in main
    parsed.requirements_dir, parsed.packages, parse_only=parsed.parse_only)
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/resolver.py", line 785, in _main
    resolve_packages(pre, clear, verbose, system, write, requirements_dir, packages)
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/resolver.py", line 753, in resolve_packages
    requirements_dir=requirements_dir,
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/resolver.py", line 736, in resolve
    req_dir=requirements_dir
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/utils.py", line 1386, in resolve_deps
    req_dir=req_dir,
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/utils.py", line 1091, in actually_resolve_deps
    deps, index_lookup, markers_lookup, project, sources, req_dir, clear, pre
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/utils.py", line 649, in create
    pre=pre, clear=clear
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/utils.py", line 463, in get_metadata
    req, resolver=transient_resolver
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/utils.py", line 610, in get_deps_from_req
    best_match = pypi.find_best_match(req.ireq) if pypi else None
  File "/Users/dhendry/.pyenv/versions/3.7.4/lib/python3.7/site-packages/pipenv/patched/piptools/repositories/pypi.py", line 202, in find_best_match
    raise NoCandidateFound(ireq, all_candidates, self.finder)
pipenv.patched.piptools.exceptions.NoCandidateFound: Could not find a version that matches google-python-cloud-debugger
No versions found
Was https://pypi.org/simple reachable?

Misc other notes:

uname -sr
Darwin 19.5.0

[JamesAllen16]

Just chiming in to say I'm seeing this issue too

[frostming]

@dhendry the issues don't look the same. Did you access pypi behind a proxy? Was https://pypi.org/simple reachable?

[dhendry]

@frostming No proxy, no problems with other packages, pypi.org is reachable:

[dhendry]

Any update on this? Its pretty annoying

@frostming you earlier commented that the issues do not look the same. Do you want me to open a new issue?

@techalchemy This issue still has a Status: Needs More Information label. I believe I have included a simple example to reproduce the issue. Is there any additional information I could provide to help you out?