Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/16/2018 04:21 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote:
On 16/12/2018 18:57, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote:
On 16/12/2018 18:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote:
On 12/16/2018 10:33 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote:
On 16/12/2018 16:52, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote:
On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote:
I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found
after
reading this thread:
1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I
don't know what it does. I did find
https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but
there
is no documentation.
There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment:
* This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as
* specified in the standard.
But I don't know what that means. Google points to
https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me
that we
don't need it.
2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then
I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried.
2a. The make log only references python3 once.
3. It does look for mako.
4. We could switch to meson.
A couple of remarks about mesa+P3:
- I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. The
reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although
some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and
[2]) for some time now.
Update: according to the documentation [1], Python seems to be only required
for tests. As anybody tested that Python is not needed if the tests are not
run (and/or built, that is P2 could be needed as soon as -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS is
ON)? If this is the case, we could make P2 optional for llvm, remove the
"-DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON" flag, and expand the test section to mention this flag.
- [...]
Pierre
[1] https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software
I am getting ready to do a new build on my laptop. Normally I don't need llvm
for mesa on that system, but I can do the build and test without P2.
I plan to start later today or tomorrow.
Thanks,
Actually, I am just starting an LLVM build right now in a VM; without Python2
installed (only Python3 from LFS). Cmake found python3 and seems OK with that.
Will let you know if it completes. I've removed the -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON switch
It completed, and actually, also building mesa, and X.
The full "X Window System environment" has been built without Python2 on the
machine. And it started with "startx" as usual.
I'm still building xorg as a part of a full rebuild on my laptop. I do
not have P2 installed. I did build P3 mako as a dependency for mesa and
I got:
Processing dependencies for Mako==1.0.7
Searching for MarkupSafe>=0.9.2
Reading https://pypi.python.org/simple/MarkupSafe/
Downloading
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/e4/c4/adcc2d6f2ac2146cc04e076f14f1006c1de8e1e747fa067668b6573000b8/MarkupSafe-1.1.0-cp37-cp37m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl#sha256=d9ac82be533394d341b41d78aca7ed0e0f4ba5a2231602e2f05aa87f25c51672
Best match: MarkupSafe 1.1.0
Processing MarkupSafe-1.1.0-cp37-cp37m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
Installing MarkupSafe-1.1.0-cp37-cp37m-manylinux1_x86_64.whl to
/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages
Adding MarkupSafe 1.1.0 to easy-install.pth file
So it works like cpan and downloads/builds/installs dependencies if they
are not present. I note that Beaker is not mentioned though.
mesa configure gives:
hecking for a Python interpreter with version >= 2.7... python3
checking for python3... /usr/bin/python3
checking for python3 version... 3.7
checking for python3 platform... linux
checking for python3 script directory...
${prefix}/lib/python3.7/site-packages
checking for python3 extension module directory...
${exec_prefix}/lib/python3.7/site-packages
...
checking if module mako in python is installed... yes
In my make log, there is no mention of python at all.
In the check log, there is no mention of python at all.
The bottom line is that I think we can make P2 optional for mesa and say
that it's not needed since P3 is installed in LFS.
For mako I think we can drop the Beaker dependency (indeed all of Beaker
and funcsigs) and only build the P3 version of mako. (Agreeing with Pierre)
We may need to keep the P2 version of MarkupSafe since it is used by
jinja2 in the systemd version of kf5. I don't know if that is P2 or P3
or both. Looking at the source for kapidox, I see
build/lib/kapidox/generator.py:
# Python 2/3 compatibility (NB: we require at least 2.7)
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 16/12/2018 18:57, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > On 16/12/2018 18:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >> On 12/16/2018 10:33 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On 16/12/2018 16:52, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > > > I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found > after > reading this thread: > > 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I > don't know what it does. I did find > https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but > there > is no documentation. > > There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: > > * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as > * specified in the standard. > > But I don't know what that means. Google points to > https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me > that we > don't need it. > > 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, > then > I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. > > 2a. The make log only references python3 once. > > 3. It does look for mako. > > 4. We could switch to meson. > A couple of remarks about mesa+P3: - I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. The reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and [2]) for some time now. >>> >>> Update: according to the documentation [1], Python seems to be only required >>> for tests. As anybody tested that Python is not needed if the tests are not >>> run (and/or built, that is P2 could be needed as soon as -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS >>> is >>> ON)? If this is the case, we could make P2 optional for llvm, remove the >>> "-DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON" flag, and expand the test section to mention this >>> flag. >>> - [...] >>> >>> Pierre >>> >>> [1] https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software >>> >> >> >> I am getting ready to do a new build on my laptop. Normally I don't need >> llvm >> for mesa on that system, but I can do the build and test without P2. >> >> I plan to start later today or tomorrow. >> > > Thanks, > > Actually, I am just starting an LLVM build right now in a VM; without Python2 > installed (only Python3 from LFS). Cmake found python3 and seems OK with that. > Will let you know if it completes. I've removed the -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON > switch > It completed, and actually, also building mesa, and X. The full "X Window System environment" has been built without Python2 on the machine. And it started with "startx" as usual. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 16/12/2018 18:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 12/16/2018 10:33 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> On 16/12/2018 16:52, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found after reading this thread: 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I don't know what it does. I did find https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but there is no documentation. There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as * specified in the standard. But I don't know what that means. Google points to https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me that we don't need it. 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. 2a. The make log only references python3 once. 3. It does look for mako. 4. We could switch to meson. >>> >>> A couple of remarks about mesa+P3: >>> >>> - I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. >>> The >>> reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although >>> some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and >>> [2]) for some time now. >> >> Update: according to the documentation [1], Python seems to be only required >> for tests. As anybody tested that Python is not needed if the tests are not >> run (and/or built, that is P2 could be needed as soon as -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS >> is >> ON)? If this is the case, we could make P2 optional for llvm, remove the >> "-DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON" flag, and expand the test section to mention this >> flag. >> >>> >>> - [...] >> >> Pierre >> >> [1] https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software >> > > > I am getting ready to do a new build on my laptop. Normally I don't need llvm > for mesa on that system, but I can do the build and test without P2. > > I plan to start later today or tomorrow. > Thanks, Actually, I am just starting an LLVM build right now in a VM; without Python2 installed (only Python3 from LFS). Cmake found python3 and seems OK with that. Will let you know if it completes. I've removed the -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON switch Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/16/2018 10:33 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: On 16/12/2018 16:52, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found after reading this thread: 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I don't know what it does. I did find https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but there is no documentation. There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as * specified in the standard. But I don't know what that means. Google points to https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me that we don't need it. 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. 2a. The make log only references python3 once. 3. It does look for mako. 4. We could switch to meson. A couple of remarks about mesa+P3: - I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. The reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and [2]) for some time now. Update: according to the documentation [1], Python seems to be only required for tests. As anybody tested that Python is not needed if the tests are not run (and/or built, that is P2 could be needed as soon as -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS is ON)? If this is the case, we could make P2 optional for llvm, remove the "-DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON" flag, and expand the test section to mention this flag. - [...] Pierre [1] https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software I am getting ready to do a new build on my laptop. Normally I don't need llvm for mesa on that system, but I can do the build and test without P2. I plan to start later today or tomorrow. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 16/12/2018 16:52, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >> >> >> I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found >> after >> reading this thread: >> >> 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I >> don't know what it does. I did find >> https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but >> there >> is no documentation. >> >> There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: >> >> * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as >> * specified in the standard. >> >> But I don't know what that means. Google points to >> https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me that >> we >> don't need it. >> >> 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then >> I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. >> >> 2a. The make log only references python3 once. >> >> 3. It does look for mako. >> >> 4. We could switch to meson. >> > > A couple of remarks about mesa+P3: > > - I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. The > reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although > some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and > [2]) for some time now. Update: according to the documentation [1], Python seems to be only required for tests. As anybody tested that Python is not needed if the tests are not run (and/or built, that is P2 could be needed as soon as -DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS is ON)? If this is the case, we could make P2 optional for llvm, remove the "-DLLVM_BUILD_TESTS=ON" flag, and expand the test section to mention this flag. > > - [...] Pierre [1] https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 13/12/2018 23:05, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 12/13/2018 03:06 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> On 13/12/2018 21:44, Brendan L via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:15 AM Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev >>> wrote: On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev > wrote: >> >> Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes >> down >> to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we >> could >> remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it >> cannot >> be replaced with P3)? >> >> I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here >> is the >> list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with >> python >> modules, but I think it is not that important. > > I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? > >>> Package: Mesa-18.2.6 required >>> >>> Just thought I would chime in to say that Mesa-18.3 is released, which >>> now has python 3 support. I haven't got a chance to test it myself. >>> >> >> Thanks a lot for the information. If mesa supports P3, the whole stack of >> modules for Mako can be made P3 only, I think, and funcsigs can be removed >> (since it is now shipped with core Python since Python 3.3) > > I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found after > reading this thread: > > 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I > don't know what it does. I did find > https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but there > is no documentation. > > There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: > > * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as > * specified in the standard. > > But I don't know what that means. Google points to > https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me that we > don't need it. > > 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then > I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. > > 2a. The make log only references python3 once. > > 3. It does look for mako. > > 4. We could switch to meson. > A couple of remarks about mesa+P3: - I think I will not be able to test building mesa with only P3 available. The reason is that I need llvmpipe, and that LLVM seems to require P2 (although some work seems to have been done in order to support P3 (see e.g. [1] and [2]) for some time now. - If Mako is still required (but it seems it wasn't for Bruce), I still plan to move the Mako stack to P3 only, if possible. - (maybe OT respective to the thread, but relevant for mesa) I read in the release notes for mesa that libwayland-egl has been moved to wayland. Do we still need to specify wayland as a platform for mesa? Pierre [1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/llvm-dev/hPWKyWWerQ4 [2] https://reviews.llvm.org/D42674 -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/13/2018 03:06 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: On 13/12/2018 21:44, Brendan L via blfs-dev wrote: On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:15 AM Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot be replaced with P3)? I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with python modules, but I think it is not that important. I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? Package: Mesa-18.2.6 required Just thought I would chime in to say that Mesa-18.3 is released, which now has python 3 support. I haven't got a chance to test it myself. Thanks a lot for the information. If mesa supports P3, the whole stack of modules for Mako can be made P3 only, I think, and funcsigs can be removed (since it is now shipped with core Python since Python 3.3) I just updated to mesa-18.3.1 earlier today. A couple of things I found after reading this thread: 1. Package libtizcore was not found. We don't have this mentioned and I don't know what it does. I did find https://github.com/tizonia/tizonia-openmax-il/tree/master/libtizcore but there is no documentation. There is only one file in src/. It is a 1900 line .c file. A comment: * This library implements the base OpenMAX IL Core infrastructure, as * specified in the standard. But I don't know what that means. Google points to https://www.khronos.org/openmaxil but a very fast scan indicates to me that we don't need it. 2. Using PYTHON=python3 in the configure works. If P2 is not present, then I suspect that it would pick it up automatically, but I've not tried. 2a. The make log only references python3 once. 3. It does look for mako. 4. We could switch to meson. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 13/12/2018 21:44, Brendan L via blfs-dev wrote: > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:15 AM Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev > wrote: >> >> On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev >>> wrote: Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot be replaced with P3)? I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with python modules, but I think it is not that important. >>> >>> I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? >>> >> > >> Package: Mesa-18.2.6 >> required >> > > Just thought I would chime in to say that Mesa-18.3 is released, which > now has python 3 support. I haven't got a chance to test it myself. > Thanks a lot for the information. If mesa supports P3, the whole stack of modules for Mako can be made P3 only, I think, and funcsigs can be removed (since it is now shipped with core Python since Python 3.3) Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:15 AM Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > > On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev > > wrote: > >> > >> Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes > >> down > >> to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could > >> remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it > >> cannot > >> be replaced with P3)? > >> > >> I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is > >> the > >> list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with > >> python > >> modules, but I think it is not that important. > > > > I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? > > > > Package: Mesa-18.2.6 > required > Just thought I would chime in to say that Mesa-18.3 is released, which now has python 3 support. I haven't got a chance to test it myself. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 09/12/2018 09:14, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >>> >>> Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down >>> to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could >>> remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot >>> be replaced with P3)? >>> >>> I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is >>> the >>> list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with >>> python >>> modules, but I think it is not that important. >> >> I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? >> > > Oops, I was using whatever was there in my test directory, and it has not been > updated since September... For the record, the same list with a current book. > I've fixed Python modules, too: > And it shows that deps for Python modules are fairly inaccurate. I think it is worth a ticket (I'll open it after finishing this message), where each module can be discussed in detail. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 08/12/2018 23:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> >> Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down >> to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could >> remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot >> be replaced with P3)? >> >> I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the >> list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with >> python >> modules, but I think it is not that important. > > I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? > Oops, I was using whatever was there in my test directory, and it has not been updated since September... For the record, the same list with a current book. I've fixed Python modules, too: Package: CrackLib-2.9.6 optional Package: cryptsetup-2.0.6 optional Package: GPGME-1.12.0 optional Package: MIT Kerberos V5-1.16.2 optional Package: volume_key-0.3.12 required Package: btrfs-progs-4.19 optional Package: Vim-8.1 optional Package: qemu-3.0.0 required Package: Boost-1.68.0 optional Package: gobject-introspection-1.58.1 optional Package: js52-52.2.1gnome1 required Package: js60-60.1.0 required Package: libbytesize-1.4 optional Package: libxml2-2.9.8 optional Package: nodejs-10.14.1 required Package: Talloc-2.1.14 optional Package: gegl-0.4.12 optional Package: Graphite2-1.3.12 optional Package: HarfBuzz-2.2.0 optional Package: Little CMS-1.19 optional Package: newt-0.52.20 optional Package: opencv-3.4.3 optional Package: Poppler-0.71.0 recommended Package: asciidoc-8.6.9 optional Package: Graphviz-2.40.1 optional Package: GTK-Doc-1.29 required Package: usbutils-010 required Package: Doxygen-1.8.14 optional Package: GDB-8.2 optional Package: git-2.19.1 recommended Package: LLVM-7.0.0 required Package: Mercurial-4.7.2 required Package: Python Modules Module: D-Bus Python-1.2.8 optional Package: Python Modules Module: docutils-0.14 recommended Package: Python Modules Module: PyCairo-1.17.1 optional Package: Python Modules Module: PyCrypto-2.6.1 optional Package: Python Modules Module: PyXDG-0.25 optional Package: Python Modules Module: libxml2-2.9.8 (for Python2) required Package: Python Modules Module: six-1.11.0 optional Package: SCons-3.0.0 required Package: Subversion-1.10.3 optional Package: yasm-1.3.0 optional Package: Samba-4.9.1 required Package: Wget-1.20 optional Package: Nmap-7.70 optional Package: Wicd-1.7.4 required Package: ldns-1.7.0 optional Package: libpsl-0.20.2 required Package: nghttp2-1.35.0 optional Package: fetchmail-6.3.26 optional Package: PostgreSQL-10.5 optional Package: Unbound-1.8.1 optional Package: xcb-proto-1.13 optional Package: Mesa-18.2.6 required Package: Xorg Drivers optional Package: libglade-2.6.4 optional Package: Plasma-5.13.4 required Package: Tracker-2.0.4 required Package: FontForge-20170731 optional Package: alsa-lib-1.1.7 optional Package: libmusicbrainz-2.1.5 optional Package: Cups-2.2.9 optional ---
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 06:40:31PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > > Thank you Ken. I did see that, but I was not sure it was comprehensive. If > is is, than I appreciate your analysis. > > -- Bruce > I'm not aware of anything else in the book which _I_ build that appears to need python2 modules. [1.] There are plenty of non-book packages which I build that might need python2, e.g. I build Sphinx using python2 because that was how I started to build it. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be able to find time to try to _use_ Sphinx for building the kernel docs. Checking the book, openbox, ibus, libbytesize and talloc seem to use python2 for modules. 1. I see that I'm still using python2 to build the modules from libxml2 and libxslt. That used to be for gimp-help, but I dropped building the help because most of the graphics no longer get produced by our tools. ĸen -- I'm saving up 22 shillings and 10 pence (almost a pound!) per week to buy an ARM-13. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2018/11/brexit-means-brexit.html -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/08/2018 06:26 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 05:34:52PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: As for the P2 modules, it's not clear to me whether or not any are required (or optional). Please read what I wrote upthread (pasted for your convenience): For inkscape, lxml and scour are needed. I build them both as python2 and they only install modules, so building as 3 will not allow inkscape to use them (Save As Optimized SVG). For the gimp, pygtk and its deps appear to be useful and therefore need to be python2. Thank you Ken. I did see that, but I was not sure it was comprehensive. If is is, than I appreciate your analysis. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 05:34:52PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > > As for the P2 modules, it's not clear to me whether or not any are required > (or optional). > > -- Bruce Please read what I wrote upthread (pasted for your convenience): For inkscape, lxml and scour are needed. I build them both as python2 and they only install modules, so building as 3 will not allow inkscape to use them (Save As Optimized SVG). For the gimp, pygtk and its deps appear to be useful and therefore need to be python2. ĸen -- I'm saving up 22 shillings and 10 pence (almost a pound!) per week to buy an ARM-13. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2018/11/brexit-means-brexit.html -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/08/2018 04:30 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev wrote: On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot be replaced with P3)? I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with python modules, but I think it is not that important. I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? e.g. Package: nodejs-9.11.2 required Package: HarfBuzz-1.8.8 optional However, I suspect that the packages using 2.7 are probably the same. And I'm somewhat reluctant, for the moment, to stop mentioning 2.7 where it is optional. But to move building 2.7 modules to optional, or even to remove/comment the instructions (unless they are thought to be required) seems fine. If all the references to P2 were optional, I'd have no problem making that an external reference, but we are not there yet. As for the P2 modules, it's not clear to me whether or not any are required (or optional). -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:11:03PM +0100, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > > Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down > to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could > remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot > be replaced with P3)? > > I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the > list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with python > modules, but I think it is not that important. I think you are looking at an old version of the book, maybe 8.3 ? e.g. > > Package: nodejs-9.11.2 > required > > > Package: HarfBuzz-1.8.8 > optional > However, I suspect that the packages using 2.7 are probably the same. And I'm somewhat reluctant, for the moment, to stop mentioning 2.7 where it is optional. But to move building 2.7 modules to optional, or even to remove/comment the instructions (unless they are thought to be required) seems fine. ĸen -- I'm saving up 22 shillings and 10 pence (almost a pound!) per week to buy an ARM-13. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2018/11/brexit-means-brexit.html -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 08/12/2018 17:44, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 12/08/2018 06:33 AM, Thomas Trepl via blfs-dev wrote: >> Am Samstag, den 08.12.2018, 09:39 +0100 schrieb Pierre Labastie via >> blfs-dev: >>> While testing jhalfs dependency algorithm, I discovered a few things about >>> python modules (there may be others): >>> - several modules have instructions for both python2 and python3, but >>> Python2 >>> is not listed as a dependency (or is only listed as optional). Either >>> Python2 >>> should be listed as a (recommended) dependency, or the text should be >>> changed >>> to something like: "if you have installed Python2, run the following >>> commands..." >>> >>> - scour is built only for Python2, but Python2 is not even mentioned as >>> optional >>> >>> - There is still the following sentence at the beginning of the Python >>> module >>> page: >>> "Installation of the modules shown on this page is meant to follow from top >>> to >>> bottom to handle optional dependencies in each module." >>> But I think the dependencies have been sorted out, and actually, there are >>> "out of order" recommended dependencies for some modules (e.g. PyGObjects is >>> recommended by PyAtSpi2). So this sentence should not be there (and actually >>> it has no sense as soon as there is an out of order dep). >>> >>> What I suggest: >>> -make all the python2 commands optional, by adding a sentence, adding >>> Python2 >>> as optional dep, and role="nodump" to the tag, except for >>> modules >>> where only Python2 is used, where I would make Python2 recommended. >>> -remove the sentence "Installation of the modules..." >>> >>> I can do that, but I ask first for opinions >> >> I'd suggest to remove python2 everywhere it is possible even it might >> be possible to 'compile' with python2 (no 'optional Python2 at those >> packages). P2 should now appear in book only where it is definitely >> required and yes, there are still a few packages which require P2 to >> be installed but it seems that they get fewer (scons-3.0.1 is the >> latest example, it now works fine with P3). >> While it is not that urgent (EOL of P2 is in 2020), we should no >> longer put great efforts to support it beyond the packages which >> requires it. > > I agree with Thomas. Phasing out python2 would help simplify things a > little. Unfortunately I get: > > $ grep -r 'linkend="python2"' *|wc -l > 107 > Excluding the archive and the .svn directories from the search, it goes down to 70. Still a lot of work though. Do I understand correctly that we could remove reference to P2, when it is an optional dependency (even if it cannot be replaced with P3)? I've made a small xsl stylesheet to extract python2 dependencies. Here is the list: package plus dependency type. The stylesheet did not do well with python modules, but I think it is not that important. -- Package: CrackLib-2.9.6 optional Package: cryptsetup-2.0.4 optional Package: GPGME-1.11.1 optional Package: MIT Kerberos V5-1.16.1 optional Package: volume_key-0.3.11 required Package: btrfs-progs-4.17.1 optional Package: Vim-8.1 optional Package: qemu-3.0.0 required Package: Boost-1.68.0 optional Package: gobject-introspection-1.58.0 optional Package: js52-52.2.1gnome1 required Package: js60-60.1.0 required Package: libbytesize-1.4 optional Package: libxml2-2.9.8 optional Package: nodejs-9.11.2 required Package: Talloc-2.1.14 optional Package: gegl-0.4.8 optional Package: Graphite2-1.3.12 optional Package: HarfBuzz-1.8.8 optional Package: Little CMS-1.19 optional Package: newt-0.52.20 optional Package: opencv-3.4.3 optional Package: Poppler-0.68.0 recommended Package: asciidoc-8.6.9 optional Package: Graphviz-2.40.1 optional Package: GTK-Doc-1.29 required Package: usbutils-010 required Package: Doxygen-1.8.14 optional Package: GDB-8.2 optional Package: git-2.18.0 recommended Package: LLVM-6.0.1 required Package: Mercurial-4.7.1 required Package: Python Modules optional Package: Python
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 10:44:07AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 12/08/2018 06:33 AM, Thomas Trepl via blfs-dev wrote: > > Am Samstag, den 08.12.2018, 09:39 +0100 schrieb Pierre Labastie via > > blfs-dev: > > > > > > What I suggest: > > > -make all the python2 commands optional, by adding a sentence, adding > > > Python2 > > > as optional dep, and role="nodump" to the tag, except for > > > modules > > > where only Python2 is used, where I would make Python2 recommended. > > > -remove the sentence "Installation of the modules..." > > > > > > I can do that, but I ask first for opinions > > > > I'd suggest to remove python2 everywhere it is possible even it might > > be possible to 'compile' with python2 (no 'optional Python2 at those > > packages). P2 should now appear in book only where it is definitely > > required and yes, there are still a few packages which require P2 to > > be installed but it seems that they get fewer (scons-3.0.1 is the > > latest example, it now works fine with P3). > > While it is not that urgent (EOL of P2 is in 2020), we should no > > longer put great efforts to support it beyond the packages which > > requires it. > > I agree with Thomas. Phasing out python2 would help simplify things a > little. Unfortunately I get: > > $ grep -r 'linkend="python2"' *|wc -l > 107 > > So there is a lot of work there. > > Trying to isolate the python2 modules needed is not so easy. I can find > references to pygobject2, but it's not clear what other python2 only modules > are needed. > > -- Bruce > I got really excited last night when diffing firefox-64-beta14 against beta7 : various additions to allow python3 as well as python2. Unfortunately, using 3 its initial bootstrap fails in 0.112 seconds. Looking at the plethora of mozilla bugs about moving to python3, I get the impression it is still some months away from being generally buildable - but parts of mozilla's test code might now work with 3. Anyway, for me the big users of python2 apart from firefox / seamonkey / thunderbird (which I think only use core modules) are inkscape and the gimp. For inkscape, lxml and scour are needed. I build them both as python2 and they only install modules, so building as 3 will not allow inkscape to use them (Save As Optimized SVG). For the gimp, pygtk and its deps appear to be useful and therefore need to be python2. ĸen -- I'm saving up 22 shillings and 10 pence (almost a pound!) per week to buy an ARM-13. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2018/11/brexit-means-brexit.html -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
On 12/08/2018 06:33 AM, Thomas Trepl via blfs-dev wrote: Am Samstag, den 08.12.2018, 09:39 +0100 schrieb Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev: While testing jhalfs dependency algorithm, I discovered a few things about python modules (there may be others): - several modules have instructions for both python2 and python3, but Python2 is not listed as a dependency (or is only listed as optional). Either Python2 should be listed as a (recommended) dependency, or the text should be changed to something like: "if you have installed Python2, run the following commands..." - scour is built only for Python2, but Python2 is not even mentioned as optional - There is still the following sentence at the beginning of the Python module page: "Installation of the modules shown on this page is meant to follow from top to bottom to handle optional dependencies in each module." But I think the dependencies have been sorted out, and actually, there are "out of order" recommended dependencies for some modules (e.g. PyGObjects is recommended by PyAtSpi2). So this sentence should not be there (and actually it has no sense as soon as there is an out of order dep). What I suggest: -make all the python2 commands optional, by adding a sentence, adding Python2 as optional dep, and role="nodump" to the tag, except for modules where only Python2 is used, where I would make Python2 recommended. -remove the sentence "Installation of the modules..." I can do that, but I ask first for opinions I'd suggest to remove python2 everywhere it is possible even it might be possible to 'compile' with python2 (no 'optional Python2 at those packages). P2 should now appear in book only where it is definitely required and yes, there are still a few packages which require P2 to be installed but it seems that they get fewer (scons-3.0.1 is the latest example, it now works fine with P3). While it is not that urgent (EOL of P2 is in 2020), we should no longer put great efforts to support it beyond the packages which requires it. I agree with Thomas. Phasing out python2 would help simplify things a little. Unfortunately I get: $ grep -r 'linkend="python2"' *|wc -l 107 So there is a lot of work there. Trying to isolate the python2 modules needed is not so easy. I can find references to pygobject2, but it's not clear what other python2 only modules are needed. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Python modules dependencies
Am Samstag, den 08.12.2018, 09:39 +0100 schrieb Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev: > While testing jhalfs dependency algorithm, I discovered a few things about > python modules (there may be others): > - several modules have instructions for both python2 and python3, but Python2 > is not listed as a dependency (or is only listed as optional). Either Python2 > should be listed as a (recommended) dependency, or the text should be changed > to something like: "if you have installed Python2, run the following > commands..." > > - scour is built only for Python2, but Python2 is not even mentioned as > optional > > - There is still the following sentence at the beginning of the Python module > page: > "Installation of the modules shown on this page is meant to follow from top to > bottom to handle optional dependencies in each module." > But I think the dependencies have been sorted out, and actually, there are > "out of order" recommended dependencies for some modules (e.g. PyGObjects is > recommended by PyAtSpi2). So this sentence should not be there (and actually > it has no sense as soon as there is an out of order dep). > > What I suggest: > -make all the python2 commands optional, by adding a sentence, adding Python2 > as optional dep, and role="nodump" to the tag, except for modules > where only Python2 is used, where I would make Python2 recommended. > -remove the sentence "Installation of the modules..." > > I can do that, but I ask first for opinions I'd suggest to remove python2 everywhere it is possible even it might be possible to 'compile' with python2 (no 'optional Python2 at those packages). P2 should now appear in book only where it is definitly required and yes, there are still a few packages which require P2 to be installed but it seems that they get fewer (scons-3.0.1 is the latest example, it now works fine with P3). While it is not that urgent (EOL of P2 is in 2020), we should no longer put great efforts to support it beyond the packages which requires it. Just my 2 ct -- Thomas -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
