Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 10:00:51AM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> Do you mean to use "
> ​​python3.6_3.6.1-1.debian.tar.xz" (of 3.6.1) and change its number to
> "python3.6_3.6.4-4.debian.tar.xz" (of 3.6.4) and change its changelog
> content?
No, I meant to use the debian/ directory from that tarball, otherwise the
idea is more or less correct.

> Unfortunately, the .debian.tar.xz for 3.6.1 already disappear from Debian
> repository!
Well, you were able to compare the packaging so you had it locally. If you
don't anymore, there is always http://snapshot.debian.org/

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 7:43 AM, Brian May  wrote:

> Nguyễn Hồng Quân  writes:
>
> If using pip to install packages is fine (which can result in compiling
> from source although increasing use of wheels helps), then I personally
> fail to see the problem with using something like pyenv.
>
>
​I use pip to install from pre-built wheel. I don't let pip to compile the
source on my embedded computer, because it also takes much time.​
​So in summary, I tried to avoid doing compilation job directly on my
embedded computer, either Python interpreter or Python C libraries.​

(Where I get wheel? I rent a bare-metal ARM server from Scaleway to build
the wheel there).


-- 
Quân

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 3:16 AM, Matthew Woodcraft 
wrote:

> Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
>
> You didn't say what dependency problem you're seeing. Is it python3.6
> depending on python3-distutils?
>

​Yes, and when I tried to backport python3-disutils, it depends on python
3.7 !!!​

​https://packages.debian.org/source/buster/python3-stdlib-extensions​

-- 
Quân

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:58 AM, Jeremy Stanley  wrote:

> On 2018-04-24 23:42:30 +0700 (+0700), Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> [...]
> I completely understand the reason for using packages, but Debian is
> a volunteer project which does not exist solely to solve your
> problems so you can either do something you already know how to do
> (build Python 3.6 from source) and move on, or learn to make the
> packages you want (including fixing any backporting issues you find
> when doing so). Asking others to tell you how to do that is not the
> sort of self-directed research expected of participants in a
> volunteer project, it's at best begging and at worst disrespectful
> of those who have invested the time to learn the things you're not
> willing.
>
> https://backports.debian.org/Contribute/
>

​Sorry if you feel disrespectful. But don't you think that this issue is
not mine-only, it may be other users as well?
​I spent much time to research on it, so that I can tell what difference
between 3.6.1 and 3.6.4 packaging.​

My voice here may let the packager think again why they make package
scripts so different between minor versions of Python. Don't you think that
it is good?

-- 
Quân

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:21 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin 
wrote:

>
> No, you are talking about the 3.6.4 packaging files while I'm suggesting
> to not use them.
>

Do you mean to use "
​​python3.6_3.6.1-1.debian.tar.xz" (of 3.6.1) and change its number to
"python3.6_3.6.4-4.debian.tar.xz" (of 3.6.4) and change its changelog
content?

Unfortunately, the .debian.tar.xz for 3.6.1 already disappear from Debian
repository!
Today, even the 3.6.4 disappears, only 3.6.5 stay and the dependencies
graph of 3.6.5 is the same as 3.6.4.

-- 
Quân

Re: [Python-modules-team] Bug#896429: python3-django-tables2: django_tables2 fails to import

[Brian May]

Thomas Goirand  writes:

> Feel free to raise this on a Django upstream message. I very much agree
> this isn't best.

I believe there is (or at least was, and probably still is) general
agreement that the Django settings mechanism is horrible for numerous
reasons. IIRC this has been discussed at past PyCON AU conferences.

Unfortunately, this has been labelled as a "hard problem". As in coming
up with a replacement that the Django core developers can agree to is
non-trivial (which also means dealing with existing applications in a
sensible manner).

e.g. do a google search for "django settings class" and you will see
that there are a number of projects to get class based settings for
Django. A feature I really wish Django supported out of the
box. Unfortunately most of these projects (I might have missed
something) appear to have been abandoned.

Maybe this is an isssue that needs to be pushed at PyCon or PyConAU.

If there isn't an existing upstream bug report already, somebody should
definitely file one. Or add details as to how the problem affects
testing, if not already given. I don't believe the bug report by itself
will solve this problem, but I think it is a necessarily prerequisite
for a solution.
-- 
Brian May 

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Brian May]

Nguyễn Hồng Quân  writes:

> ​Sorry? As I told, just leave the python3-xxx packages to be used with
> python3.5 (default Python3 of Debian 9).
> I don't need those to be used with Python3.6.
> For whatever I need to use with Python3.6, I just install via "pip3.6".​
> For Python3.6, you just need to provide python3.6 (+ its standard lib),
> python3.6-dev.

If using pip to install packages is fine (which can result in compiling
from source although increasing use of wheels helps), then I personally
fail to see the problem with using something like pyenv.
-- 
Brian May 

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Matthew Woodcraft]

Ludovic Gasc wrote:

2018-04-24 22:16 GMT+02:00 Matthew Woodcraft :



You didn't say what dependency problem you're seeing. Is it python3.6
depending on python3-distutils?

If it is, you might try building the 3.6.5-3 source package from sid
rather than the 3.6.5~rc1-1 package from buster, as that dependency has
been removed there.

That should give you a working Python 3.6, but without distutils which
has recently been moved to the python3-stdlib-extensions package. If you
need distutils you might try backporting that too.



Upgrade the python system from 3.5 to 3.6 might breaks some python system
libraries, no ?


So long as it's just the binaries from the python3.6 source package, they
should install in parallel and cause no trouble (it would be like installing
the python3.7 packages in Buster today, which would go in parallel to 3.6).

I think rebuilding python3-stdlib-extensions would be OK too if done with
enough care; it would need persuading to build packages including libraries
for both 3.5 and 3.6. But yes, that's more risky as it means replacing Stretch
packages rather than just adding new ones.

-M-

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Ludovic Gasc]

2018-04-24 22:16 GMT+02:00 Matthew Woodcraft :

> Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
>
>> I'm using Debian 9 on an ARM board (BeagleBone), for our IoT project.
>> We write an application which needs Python 3.6. But we are struggling with
>> packaging Python 3.6 as deb packages for Debian 9. We found the dsc file
>> for Debian buster. But there is difference in dependency hierarchy between
>> Stretch and Buster, so the found script produces *.deb files which are not
>> installable (due to missing dependencies).
>>
>
> You didn't say what dependency problem you're seeing. Is it python3.6
> depending on python3-distutils?
>
> If it is, you might try building the 3.6.5-3 source package from sid
> rather than the 3.6.5~rc1-1 package from buster, as that dependency has
> been removed there.
>
> That should give you a working Python 3.6, but without distutils which
> has recently been moved to the python3-stdlib-extensions package. If you
> need distutils you might try backporting that too.
>
>
Upgrade the python system from 3.5 to 3.6 might breaks some python system
libraries, no ?

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Matthew Woodcraft]

Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:

I'm using Debian 9 on an ARM board (BeagleBone), for our IoT project.
We write an application which needs Python 3.6. But we are struggling with
packaging Python 3.6 as deb packages for Debian 9. We found the dsc file
for Debian buster. But there is difference in dependency hierarchy between
Stretch and Buster, so the found script produces *.deb files which are not
installable (due to missing dependencies).


You didn't say what dependency problem you're seeing. Is it python3.6
depending on python3-distutils?

If it is, you might try building the 3.6.5-3 source package from sid
rather than the 3.6.5~rc1-1 package from buster, as that dependency has
been removed there.

That should give you a working Python 3.6, but without distutils which
has recently been moved to the python3-stdlib-extensions package. If you
need distutils you might try backporting that too.

-M-

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Jeremy Stanley]

On 2018-04-24 23:42:30 +0700 (+0700), Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
[...]
> Then why Debian project invent *.deb file, not just pack binary as
> tar file and let user to untar it? I favor building deb file,
> rather than copying "make altinstall" result, because of the same
> reason.

I completely understand the reason for using packages, but Debian is
a volunteer project which does not exist solely to solve your
problems so you can either do something you already know how to do
(build Python 3.6 from source) and move on, or learn to make the
packages you want (including fixing any backporting issues you find
when doing so). Asking others to tell you how to do that is not the
sort of self-directed research expected of participants in a
volunteer project, it's at best begging and at worst disrespectful
of those who have invested the time to learn the things you're not
willing.

https://backports.debian.org/Contribute/

-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:11:03AM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:05 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > How is this related to my suggestion?
> >
> 
> 
> ​Your suggestion is:
> 
> ​"
> ​
> ​Adapt it from the 3.6.1 one. Replacing the tarball and changing the
> version in the changelog"
> 
> ​And I'm proving that it is not enough.​
No, you are talking about the 3.6.4 packaging files while I'm suggesting
to not use them.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:05 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin 
wrote:

>
> How is this related to my suggestion?
>


​Your suggestion is:

​"
​
​Adapt it from the 3.6.1 one. Replacing the tarball and changing the
version in the changelog"

​And I'm proving that it is not enough.​

There are so many change between Debian's Python 3.6.1 & 3.6.4 packaging
script that I cannot do it myself and I have to request here. I don't
understand the packaging as well as the maintainers here.


-- 
Quân

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:01:45AM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin  wrote:
> 
> > > > Adapt it from the 3.6.1 one?
> > > >
> > >
> > > ​Excuse me. What do​ ​you mean by "adapt"?
> > Replacing the tarball and changing the version in the changelog, for a
> > start.
> >
> 
> As I told: "But there is difference in dependency hierarchy between Stretch
> and Buster, so the found script produces *.deb files which are not
> installable (due to missing dependencies)."
> 
> ​Changing changelog file is not enough to make it works.
> 
> One example:
> From 3.6.4, the build script specifies that​ python3.6 depends on
> python3-distutils, but python3-distutils doesn't exist on Debian stretch.
> In 3.61, there is no this dependence relationship, so the deb is
> installable on Debian stretch.
> 
> "python3-distutils" is just one of problems starting to appear from Python
> 3.6.4 packaging script.
How is this related to my suggestion?

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin  wrote:

> > > Adapt it from the 3.6.1 one?
> > >
> >
> > ​Excuse me. What do​ ​you mean by "adapt"?
> Replacing the tarball and changing the version in the changelog, for a
> start.
>

As I told: "But there is difference in dependency hierarchy between Stretch
and Buster, so the found script produces *.deb files which are not
installable (due to missing dependencies)."

​Changing changelog file is not enough to make it works.

One example:
>From 3.6.4, the build script specifies that​ python3.6 depends on
python3-distutils, but python3-distutils doesn't exist on Debian stretch.
In 3.61, there is no this dependence relationship, so the deb is
installable on Debian stretch.

"python3-distutils" is just one of problems starting to appear from Python
3.6.4 packaging script.


-- 
Quân

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:19 PM, Jeremy Stanley  wrote:

> On 2018-04-24 22:07:03 +0700 (+0700), Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't need to "not disturb" system.
> > If have to use conda, pyenv, I would rather build Python3.6 from source
> > tarball, not to bring more overhead (conda body, pyenv body), and
> > "Python3.6 from source" still not disturb my system, because it is
> > installed to "/usr/local".
> >
> > But I don't want any method that requires to build Python from source
> > (tarball, pythonz, conda or alike), because I really need *pre-built
> > binaries*.
> [...]
>
> Unless I'm missing something, there's no substantial difference
> between building a package of Python3.6 and copying it to the
> system, or performing a `make altinstall` and copying the resulting
> files (via rsync, tar and scp, whatever) to the target system. If
> you're okay with the idea of building packages remotely, then why
> not build from source remotely?
>

​Then why Debian project invent *.deb file, not just pack binary as tar
file and let user to untar it?​
​I favor building deb file, rather than copying "make altinstall" result,
because of the same reason.​


-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Jeremy Stanley]

On 2018-04-24 22:07:03 +0700 (+0700), Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
[...]
> I don't need to "not disturb" system.
> If have to use conda, pyenv, I would rather build Python3.6 from source
> tarball, not to bring more overhead (conda body, pyenv body), and
> "Python3.6 from source" still not disturb my system, because it is
> installed to "/usr/local".
> 
> But I don't want any method that requires to build Python from source
> (tarball, pythonz, conda or alike), because I really need *pre-built
> binaries*.
[...]

Unless I'm missing something, there's no substantial difference
between building a package of Python3.6 and copying it to the
system, or performing a `make altinstall` and copying the resulting
files (via rsync, tar and scp, whatever) to the target system. If
you're okay with the idea of building packages remotely, then why
not build from source remotely?
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:07:03PM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> ​So, I try to build Python as deb and use apt to install to my board. I was
> successful to do so with Python 3.6.1, using the .dsc file found on Debian
> buster repo. But since Python 3.6.4, the build script has changed
> drastically that​ it cannot be use to build for Debian stretch.
> 
> Btw, what I need is just a build/packaging script. I don't need you to
> build and publish Python3.6 to official repository.
Adapt it from the 3.6.1 one?

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Ludovic Gasc  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You can use pythonz, conda or pyenv to install the version of Python you
> want without to disturb your system.
>

​I don't need to "not disturb" system.
If have to use conda, pyenv, I would rather build Python3.6 from source
tarball, not to bring more overhead (conda body, pyenv body), and
"Python3.6 from source"​ still not disturb my system, because it is
installed to "/usr/local".

But I don't want any method that requires to build Python from source
(tarball, pythonz, conda or alike), because I really need *pre-built
binaries*.

As I told in the first email, I use Python in an embedded board (BeagleBone
Black), which is very limited in term of disk space and CPU.
Building Python is a very heavy job, taking nights to done, and I also want
to save flash space from storing Python source.


​So, I try to build Python as deb and use apt to install to my board. I was
successful to do so with Python 3.6.1, using the .dsc file found on Debian
buster repo. But since Python 3.6.4, the build script has changed
drastically that​ it cannot be use to build for Debian stretch.

Btw, what I need is just a build/packaging script. I don't need you to
build and publish Python3.6 to official repository.

-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Ludovic Gasc]

Hi,

You can use pythonz, conda or pyenv to install the version of Python you
want without to disturb your system.

Regards.

--
Ludovic Gasc (GMLudo)

2018-04-24 8:58 GMT+02:00 Nguyễn Hồng Quân :

> I'm using Debian 9 on an ARM board (BeagleBone), for our IoT project.
> We write an application which needs Python 3.6. But we are struggling with
> packaging Python 3.6 as deb packages for Debian 9. We found the dsc file
> for Debian buster. But there is difference in dependency hierarchy between
> Stretch and Buster, so the found script produces *.deb files which are not
> installable (due to missing dependencies).
>
> Could you please provide an official packaging script for Python 3.6 and
> Debian 9?
>
> Thank you.
>
>
> --
> Quân
>
> Nguyễn Hồng Quân
> ☎ 093 9030 338
> Facebook: ng.hong.quan
> 🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn
>
>

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 5:41 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:27:08PM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> > > It's not enough to backport the interpreter, all binary modules will
> need
> > > to be recompiled too.
> > ​Why?​
> To be able to be imported in Python3.6.
>

​Sorry? As I told, just leave the python3-xxx packages to be used with
python3.5 (default Python3 of Debian 9).
I don't need those to be used with Python3.6.
For whatever I need to use with Python3.6, I just install via "pip3.6".​
For Python3.6, you just need to provide python3.6 (+ its standard lib),
python3.6-dev.

-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn

Re: Please add me to PAPT on Salsa

[Ondrej Novy]

Hi,

2018-04-24 14:33 GMT+02:00 Tobias Hansen :
>
> Seems to be a bit outdated, but I accept the spirit. ;)
>
right, it needs revision :). Welcome.

-- 
Best regards
 Ondřej Nový

Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5  6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B

Re: Please add me to PAPT on Salsa

[Tobias Hansen]

On 04/24/2018 01:53 PM, Ondrej Novy wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> 2018-04-21 10:57 GMT+02:00 Tobias Hansen  >:
>
> I would like to help maintaining cython. I am already a member of DPMT.
>
>
> do you accept our PAPT policy 
> (http://python-apps.alioth.debian.org/policy.html 
> )?
>
> -- 
> Best regards
>  Ondřej Nový
>  
> Email: n...@ondrej.org 
> PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5  6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B
>
Seems to be a bit outdated, but I accept the spirit. ;)

Best,

Tobias

Re: Please add me to PAPT on Salsa

[Ondrej Novy]

Hi Tobias,

2018-04-21 10:57 GMT+02:00 Tobias Hansen :

> I would like to help maintaining cython. I am already a member of DPMT.
>

do you accept our PAPT policy (http://python-apps.alioth.
debian.org/policy.html)?

-- 
Best regards
 Ondřej Nový

Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5  6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B

Re: Request joining DPMT

[Ondrej Novy]

Hi,

2018-04-22 3:15 GMT+02:00 Lars Kruse :

> I would like to join DPMT.
>

welcome :)

-- 
Best regards
 Ondřej Nový

Email: n...@ondrej.org
PGP: 3D98 3C52 EB85 980C 46A5  6090 3573 1255 9D1E 064B

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:27:08PM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> > It's not enough to backport the interpreter, all binary modules will need
> > to be recompiled too.
> >
> 
> ​Why?​
To be able to be imported in Python3.6.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 3:12 PM, W. Martin Borgert 
wrote:

> This is interesting! Did you also compare Python 2.7 with 3.5/3.6?
>
>
​No, I'm not interested in Python 2. Every my project is started with
Python 3.​

-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin  wrote:

> It's not enough to backport the interpreter, all binary modules will need
> to be recompiled too.
>

​Why?​
Just leave Python3.6 exist in parallel to Python3.5. Don't touch Python3.5
package folder. Don't convert python3-xxx to be usable with Python3.6.


-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[W. Martin Borgert]

Quoting Nguyễn Hồng Quân :

Python 3.6 has much better performance than Python 3.5, especially on
embedded computer (I tried and compared).


This is interesting! Did you also compare Python 2.7 with 3.5/3.6?
I'm looking for more reasons to finally port my embedded software :~)

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 01:58:23PM +0700, Nguyễn Hồng Quân wrote:
> Could you please provide an official packaging script for Python 3.6 and
> Debian 9?
It's not enough to backport the interpreter, all binary modules will need
to be recompiled too.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[W. Martin Borgert]

Quoting Nguyễn Hồng Quân :

We write an application which needs Python 3.6.


Could you elaborate, why you need Python 3.6 instead of 3.5?
Maybe there is a way to make your application work with 3.5?
E.g. by backporting specific modules?

Re: Backport of Python 3.6 for Debian Stretch?

[Nguyễn Hồng Quân]

Python 3.6 has much better performance than Python 3.5, especially on
embedded computer (I tried and compared).
I also like new Python 3.6 features: f-string, improved type hint (Python
3.5 has it, but Python 3.6 improved).

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 2:44 PM, W. Martin Borgert 
wrote:

> Could you elaborate, why you need Python 3.6 instead of 3.5?
> Maybe there is a way to make your application work with 3.5?
> E.g. by backporting specific modules?
>

-- 
Quân

Nguyễn Hồng Quân
☎ 093 9030 338
Facebook: ng.hong.quan
🌏 quan.hoabinh.vn  agriconnect.vn