On December 15, 2019 8:14:20 AM CST, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev <blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 08:57:09AM +0000, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: >> On December 12, 2019 11:30:59 PM CST, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev ><blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >> >> > >> >Going forward, perhaps we need to install python3 as both python3 >> >and python, and find a way to stop python2, if it is installed, >> >installing as python ? >> > >> >Maybe as simple as: >> > >> >1. in LFS ln -sv python3 /usr/bin/python >> > >> >2. in BLFS, if installign python2 : >> > rm /usr/bin/python >> > ln -sv python3 /usr/bin/python >> > >> > ?? >> > >> >Yes, I know that upstream python has claimed that python should >> >still be python2, but I think we're fast going to reach the point >> >where that causes more trouble than it is worth. >> >> That's not exactly correct. We are at the point where the majority >use python3. We need to get rid of python2 build instructions for >remaining modules that are not dependencies for something else using >python2, sed/patch the remaining packages to explicitly use >'/usr/bin/python2' or '/usr/bin/env python2' and then we are compliant >with the PEP (84 IIRC) with a python->python3 symlink. The big thing is >the "majority" of packages, though it was worded differently IIRC. Arch >can really help here. >> >> > >> >For the moment, I'm giving up on this slithering mess. >> > >> >Maybe I'll try creating the python symlink, or maybe it would be >> >easier to just start banging my head agaisnt a brick wall. >> > >> >> --DJ >> >So, I looked at Arch and they are still using python2 for JS60. > >Fedora's build uses raw firefoxi68, I'm reluctant to try that. >As I said in my original post: There is an issue for >spidermonkey68 at gnome: > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gjs/issues/270 which is >apparently waiting for firefox 68.4.0 before it is ready. That >version of firefox should be released at the start of January. > >I suspect that when the new spidermonkey appears it _will_ need >the python -> python3 symlink. > >In the meantime I found a patch at >https://code.foxkit.us/adelie/packages/blob/f2b5773da19ab397fbe64fd32dacc383cfe4cd77/user/mozjs/python3.patch >from Adelie linux, originally against 52.4. A very strange patch, I >could not get it to apply at all, so in the end I've spent some time >manually running seds for some obvious things (e.g. remove from >__future__) and then attempting to manually apply the other changes. >Of course, some of the code has changed, and I'm sure not everything >is right. > >What is most odd about the patch is that the first part has (original) >and (refactored) marks for old and new files, but much later many >other more conventional diffs have been appended, often several for >the same file. > >But when I gave it a first go, with python symlinked to python3, the >configure immediately failed: > >ken@plexi /tmp/mozjs-60.8.0/mozjs-build $../js/src/configure >--prefix=/usr \ >> --with-intl-api \ >> --with-system-zlib \ >> --with-system-icu \ >> --disable-jemalloc \ >> --enable-readline > File "../js/src/../../configure.py", line 65 > print("Creating config.status", file=sys.stderr)
Sorry, I missed this. Yes this is python3 syntax so something is calling python2 explicitly. --DJ -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
