Excerpts from Bohuslav Kabrda's message of 2015-03-02 22:17 +10:00: > ----- Original Message ----- > > Excerpts from Bohuslav Kabrda's message of 2015-03-02 21:59 +10:00: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > Under the current proposal every package with Python 3 dependencies > > > > would have to depend on a specific python3x-* package, so then it would > > > > be up to the maintainers of all those packages to manually bump their > > > > Requires from python34-* to python35-* at some point. Which, now that > > > > I think about it, is not that great. Even worse, if any packages form > > > > a transitive dependency chain then *all* packages in the chain have to > > > > update their Requires at the same time to avoid having a mix of > > > > python34-* and python35-* requirements. > > > > > > Not really. The requires/buildrequires should be in form of > > > Requires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-six > > > so when we change %python3_pkgversion in the minimal buildroot, > > > maintainer just rebuilds and gets updated requires. > > > > Hmm okay. I didn't realise this. > > > > So that means that: > > * Fedora specfiles can't be used unchanged (they will require python3-*, > > needs to have %{python3_pkgversion} macro inserted) > > True, but note that we'll make %python3_pkgversion macro available > also in Fedora (always defined to "3"), so once this change is done, > it'll be possible to have the same specfile both in Fedora and EPEL.
Okay that's good. > > * applications will need to be rebuilt to pick up a change from > > python34-* to python35-* > > which is a bit unfortunate. > > > > Is there any reason why we shouldn't just upgrade applications to the > > python35-* stack straight away, by providing python3-*? > > Yeah. First of all, it may happen that there are some minor backwards > incompatibilities. Lots of packages run tests during buildtime, so > these will be caught. > Another reason is that there are applications, which store files in > /usr/lib/python3.X/site-packages - these need to be rebuilt anyway, > since they have the Python minor version incorporated in path of > files. > I really think that we should rebuild applications with new Python > 3.X. Well, they should really be using pkg_resources instead of hardcoding the path... but yes I take your point. Rebuilding for the newer Python stack makes sense. We will need to make sure that setuptools-generated entry points have a shebang of /usr/bin/python3.4 rather than just /usr/bin/python3 though, so that the scripts are always invoked with the same Python stack they are built for. Currently on Fedora they have /usr/bin/python3. This might need a patch to setuptools/distutils/whatever it is? -- Dan Callaghan <dcall...@redhat.com> Software Engineer, Hosted & Shared Services Red Hat, Inc.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel