From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from exprod5og108.obsmtp.com ([64.18.0.186]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBkqE-0006MA-3C for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 11 May 2010 10:29:27 +0200 Received: from source ([4.79.213.129]) (using TLSv1) by exprod5ob108.postini.com ([64.18.4.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKS+kUfcaL7/RILhtlORZxpVIXEmraOnSs@postini.com; Tue, 11 May 2010 01:25:35 PDT Received: from unknown (HELO cinmlip01.e2k.ad.ge.com) ([3.159.213.48]) by Alpmlip06.e2k.ad.ge.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2010 04:23:33 -0400 Received: from es-j7s4d2j.amer.consind.ge.com (HELO [3.138.54.92]) ([3.138.54.92]) by cinmlip01.e2k.ad.ge.com with ESMTP; 11 May 2010 04:23:32 -0400 Message-ID: <4BE91403.9080001@ge.com> Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 09:23:31 +0100 From: Martyn Welch User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1273507486.2994.189.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1273507486.2994.189.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.18.0.186 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: martyn.welch@ge.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: Supported Python version for OE? X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 08:29:27 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joshua Lock wrote: > Hi, > > A question, (perhaps for the TSC?): > > "What's the minimum Python version we want to support in OE?" > > According to the wiki we support Python 2.4 and above but I wonder if > people have any thoughts with regards to bumping it? > I'd suggest that the better question to ask is: "Which versions of which distros do we currently intend OE to work on?" Given that the revisions of Python for the following distributions are as follows: Ubuntu 10.04 LTS - 2.6.5 Ubuntu 8.04 LTS - 2.5.2 Debian lenny (stable) - 2.5.2 Debian squeeze (testing) - 2.5.3 Debian sid (unstable) - 2.5.4 Debian etch (oldstable) - 2.4.4 Fedora 12 - 2.6.2 Fedora 11 - 2.6 Fedora 10 - 2.5.2 Fedora 9 - 2.5.1 Fedora 8 - 2.5.1 Fedora 7 - 2.5 Fedora 6 - 2.4.3 RHEL6 (beta) - 2.6.2 RHEL5 - 2.4.3 OpenSUSE 11.2 - 2.6.2 OpenSUSE 11.1 - 2.6.0 OpenSUSE 11.0 - 2.5.2 This would suggest that using 2.5 features should be ok for the majority of people. My one area of concern would be those using RHEL. RHEL 6 isn't out yet and v.5 uses 2.4.3 - this wouldn't impact me, so I'm not overly fussed. > The reason I ask is because I had a user contact me about using Python > 2.5 features (str.partition) in relocatable.bbclass, I hadn't even > noticed this and seems like not many others have but it's clearly > affecting at least one person. > > I have a pretty trivial (if ugly) patch to work around this, but it > raised an interesting question so I thought I'd ask that before sending > the patch. > The only other question I can think of is "is there an advantage to using the Python 2.5 features?". Martyn > Cheers, > Joshua > -- Martyn Welch (Principal Software Engineer) | Registered in England and GE Intelligent Platforms | Wales (3828642) at 100 T +44(0)127322748 | Barbirolli Square, Manchester, E martyn.welch@ge.com | M2 3AB VAT:GB 927559189