outdated upgrade recommendation syntax

[mcandre]

Description

Hi,

Pip still often recommends old style syntax for upgrading pip.

[notice] A new release of pip is available: 25.0.1 -> 25.1.1
[notice] To update, run: pip3 install --upgrade pip

We should probably target python3 -m pip install --upgrade pip instead, as this module based syntax works more reliably across a multitude of different kinds of Python installations.

Expected behavior

No response

pip version

25.0.1

Python version

3.12.1

OS

Ubuntu 24.04

How to Reproduce

$ python -m pip install -r requirements.txt

Output

No response

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow the PSF Code of Conduct.

[ichard26]

Do you have a specific scenario where pip's recommendation is outright incorrect? pip has logic to determine whether the pip shortform can be used safely or not, with a fallback to python -m pip when the abbreviated form is inadvisable.

pip/src/pip/_internal/utils/entrypoints.py

Lines 47 to 71 in bef3535

	def get_best_invocation_for_this_pip() -> str:
	"""Try to figure out the best way to invoke pip in the current environment."""
	binary_directory = "Scripts" if WINDOWS else "bin"
	binary_prefix = os.path.join(sys.prefix, binary_directory)
	# Try to use pip[X[.Y]] names, if those executables for this environment are
	# the first on PATH with that name.
	path_parts = os.path.normcase(os.environ.get("PATH", "")).split(os.pathsep)
	exe_are_in_PATH = os.path.normcase(binary_prefix) in path_parts
	if exe_are_in_PATH:
	for exe_name in _EXECUTABLE_NAMES:
	found_executable = shutil.which(exe_name)
	binary_executable = os.path.join(binary_prefix, exe_name)
	if (
	found_executable
	and os.path.exists(binary_executable)
	and os.path.samefile(
	found_executable,
	binary_executable,
	)
	):
	return exe_name
	# Use the `-m` invocation, if there's no "nice" invocation.
	return f"{get_best_invocation_for_this_python()} -m pip"

This suggestion has been debated numerous times and frankly, I don't see a reason to change it beyond consistency. And consistency is not a good enough reason for churn here. People are going to complain if pip makes a more verbose suggestion. See also the discussion in PR #13518.

[mcandre]

I'd like a universal command. Having two variants adds confusion.

[pradyunsg]

Yea, we'd like that too but it's not technically feasible today due to how various operating systems and Python itself work.

[pradyunsg]

Whoops, clicked close accidentally. None the less, I do think that this isn't something that we can resolve and, I personally think it's good to use the shortest possible invocation for pip itself whenever possible.

[mcandre]

Let's ditch self updating entirely and trust the outer OS package management system, such as dnf, apt, apk, pkg, brew, chocolatey, asdf, pyenv, etc. to handle updates.