On 19 December 2014 at 23:01, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 09:52:26 +0000 > Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 19 December 2014 at 08:26, Maciej Fijalkowski <fij...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I would like to add that "not doing anything" is not a good strategy > > > either, because you accumulate bugs that get fixed upstream (I'm > > > pretty sure all the problems from cpython got fixed in upstream > > > libffi, but not all libffi fixes made it to cpython). > > > > Probably the easiest way of moving this forward would be for someone > > to identify the CPython-specific patches in the current version, and > > check if they are addressed in the latest libffi version. They haven't > > been applied as they are, I gather, but maybe equivalent fixes have > > been made. I've no idea how easy that would be (presumably not > > trivial, or someone would already have done it). If the patches aren't > > needed any more, upgrading becomes a lot more plausible. > > Another strategy is to dump our private fork, link with upstream > instead, and see what breaks. > Presumably, our test suite should be able to catch some (most?) of that > breakage. > And if we're going to do something like that for 3.5, now's the time, since we still have a lot of lead time on the 3.5 release. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com