Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 00/20] package/python3: bump to version 3.10

From: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
To: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
Cc: Jugurtha BELKALEM <jugurtha.belkalem@smile.fr>,
	Samuel Martin <s.martin49@gmail.com>,
	Philippe Proulx <eeppeliteloop@gmail.com>,
	Asaf Kahlon <asafka7@gmail.com>,
	Matt Weber <matthew.weber@collins.com>,
	Julien Olivain <ju.o@free.fr>,
	buildroot@buildroot.org, Mauro Condarelli <mc5686@mclink.it>,
	Oli Vogt <oli.vogt.pub01@gmail.com>,
	Adam Duskett <aduskett@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 00/20] package/python3: bump to version 3.10
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 21:30:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211010193025.GP2081069@scaer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211010155556.7a2760b2@windsurf>

Thomas, All,

On 2021-10-10 15:55 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:
> On Sat,  9 Oct 2021 13:55:03 -0700
> Adam Duskett <aduskett@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In the following patch series python3 (eventually) gets bumped to version 3.10
> > 
> > - The first parts involve updating packages that are not compatible with 3.10.
> >   Either by updating versions or adding patches.
> > 
> > - Then I fix a typo in python-pathvalidate
> > - Then I complain about python-setuptools and split add support for both
> >   setuptools 48 (compatible with python2) and 58 (compatible with python3.10)
> > - Finally I update python3 to 3.10
> > 
> > This patch series has been tested against every python2 and python3 unit-test
> > available in buildroot, including against https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20211006203823.2740442-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr/
> > 
> > In addition, I also selected *EVERY* python module to ensure all of them at
> > least build against python3.10, and everything passes.
> 
> Thanks a lot for this effort! Should we have a configuration, or a test
> case that builds all Python modules, to facilitate this kind of testing
> in the future ?
> 
> Also, should we drop Python 2.x entirely before merging this, to avoid
> the complexity on the setuptools package? Or do we consider the
> complexity to be reasonable, and therefore we handle the Python 2.x
> removal later?

I've done a (quick) inventory of all the things we have that still
require python2; no package requires python2, but for some optional
parts:

    avahi           -> auto support
    cracklib        -> auto support
    jailhouse       -> opt scripts
    libdnet         -> opt module
    libpwquality    -> auto support
    nfs-utils       -> auto script
    nmap            -> opt script
    owfs            -> auto support
    pcm-tools       -> opt script

    'opt': explicit with Config.in option
    'auto': implicit with .mk conditions
    'module': builds one+ python module
    'script': installs one+ python script
    'support': generic python support (ie. bindings?)

I am totally fine with dropping python2, if we accept the loss of the
features above, an d I think the loss is acceptable.

Note: I haven't had a look at the python-packages. For those that are
python2-only, and that have a python3-compatible version, we bump to
that version, otherwise we drop the package.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot