Greg Larkin wrote on 30.08.2011 17:56:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 8/30/11 9:38 AM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
Greg Larkin wrote on 30.08.2011 17:05:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Martin,
I have a question about a commit you made in February 2011:
http://www.freshports.org/commit.php?message_id=201102250750.p1p7ofdg016...@repoman.freebsd.org&files=yes
Part of the commit changed:
USE_PYTHON= 2.4+
to
USE_PYTHON= 2.5+
Was there a specific reason for doing so? I am running various
tinderbox builds to check on port usage of the USE_PYTHON variable, and
I noticed that devel/py-setuptools no longer builds if Python 2.4 is
selected.
I'd like to restore that capability, but before I send a PR, I wanted to
check with you first.
Thank you,
Greg
- --
Greg Larkin
http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve
http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code.
http://twitter.com/cpucycle/ - Follow you, follow me
I'm sorry for sail in, but i think that the reason is that python24 is
reached it's EOL long time ago. Actually the only supported python
releases atm according to python.org are - 2.7.2 and 3.2.1, and
developers highly encourages the users to move to this versions.
2.5 and 2.6 are in security-fix-only mode, there will be no ANY releases
for this branches after October 2011 and October 2013 respectively,
while 2.4 does not get security-fixes even.
There is also this answer from Martin in this pr:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/155526:
python24 goes to the end of month, this port is on the todo for removal
Hi Ruslan,
Hi Greg
Ok, thank you for the explanation. Shall I mark python24 for removal
from the tree or file a PR for python@ to do it?
It's not so easy actually, since we have many ports in the tree that
still depend on 2.4 (notably all that zope/plone stuff) and i believe it
was the reason why python24 still not be removed in the first place.
I do some work about eliminating python24 usage in the tree (yesterdays
py-pysqlite2x stuff - one of it), but it's not that fast. I also working
on porting zope2.13/plone4 (that supports python 2.6 and 2.7) and i'm
planing to finish it this weekend after proper testing. After that we
can deprecate/remove existing zope/plone (not longer supported upstream).
FYI, I have been running tinderbox builds with PYTHON_VERSION and
PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION set to python2.4, python2.5, etc. to find out if
ports with USE_PYTHON=yes need to be constrained a bit more.
Yes, there is a lot of work. We have USE_PYTHON with bogus values like
1.5+, 1.6+, 2.0+ etc :). And most of python ports will not work with
python3x so they should be constrained with -2.7 too.
I figured that python2.4 was supported since it was still in the tree
and wasn't marked for removal yet, but I admin that I didn't check
python.org for confirmation.
As i already stated, i believe it's still there because there is
dependent ports. And as far i know in linux world noone shipping
python24 this days. Even RHEL/CentOS finally switched to 2.6.5 in their
6.x branches.
Regards,
Greg
- --
Greg Larkin
http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve
http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code.
http://twitter.com/cpucycle/ - Follow you, follow me
--
Regards,
Ruslan
Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
