On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> We already have opensolaris with python2.6 as default - and might add
> RHEL6 (clone) in the test mix later. [Since configure succeeds with
> OSX+python2.6 - I can use it aswell.
I've migrated some of the linux builds to a centos6 box. So we now
have 2 m
Åsmund Ervik writes:
> Dear petsc-dev,
>
> Apropos this discussion, I just came across the following from Nick
> Coghlan, one of the CPython core devs and a Red Hat guy, and thought it
> might be useful for reference. You could even link to it in the error
> message suggested by Barry below; Nic
so.
http://www.curiousefficiency.org/posts/2015/04/stop-supporting-python26.html
Best regards,
Åsmund
> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:01:55 -0500
> From: Barry Smith
> To: Matthew Knepley
> Cc: petsc-dev
> Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Do we still need to support python 2.4?
>
>
&
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> >
> > Don't build from source, just get the prebuilt packages
>
> From what I could find so far - prebuils are availabe for python-2.7
> [good for users] - but not python-2.6 [I'm checking this for our
> te
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> Don't build from source, just get the prebuilt packages
>From what I could find so far - prebuils are availabe for python-2.7
[good for users] - but not python-2.6 [I'm checking this for our
testsuite]
> > We already have opensolaris with python2.6
Don't build from source, just get the prebuilt packages
> On Oct 13, 2015, at 11:10 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
>
>>> Actually I don't think python is trivial for most end-users to install
>>> [with all the modules - like ssl, compression and others s
problems arise.
Massimiliano
> -Original Message-
> From: Lisandro Dalcin [mailto:dalc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 14 October 2015 14:57
> To: Leoni, Massimiliano
> Cc: petsc-dev; Jeff Hammond
> Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Do we still need to support python 2.4?
>
> On
On 14 October 2015 at 15:37, Leoni, Massimiliano
wrote:
> How about you bring in anaconda?
> It ships with [almost] all dependencies and the installation is fairly
> automated, it should be feasible.
I guess it is just a matter of actually test Anaconda (the Miniconda
installer should be enough)
From: petsc-dev-boun...@mcs.anl.gov [mailto:petsc-dev-
> > boun...@mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Satish Balay
> > Sent: 14 October 2015 07:06
> > To: Jeff Hammond
> > Cc: petsc-dev
> > Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Do we still need to support python 2.4?
> >
> > On Wed, 14
ay
> Sent: 14 October 2015 07:06
> To: Jeff Hammond
> Cc: petsc-dev
> Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Do we still need to support python 2.4?
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Jeff Hammond wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, October 13, 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 1
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 13, 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> >
> > > PETSc can build MUMPS. Why not Python? :-)
> >
> > and gcc :)
> >
> >
> I have GCC builds almost completely automated for similar reasons as Pytho
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Jeff Hammond wrote:
>
> > PETSc can build MUMPS. Why not Python? :-)
>
> and gcc :)
>
>
I have GCC builds almost completely automated for similar reasons as Python
2.4 (eg my CentOS box is stuck with ancient GCC) so I don't
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Jeff Hammond wrote:
> PETSc can build MUMPS. Why not Python? :-)
and gcc :)
Saitsh
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
> > Actually I don't think python is trivial for most end-users to install
> > [with all the modules - like ssl, compression and others stuff that
> > configure requires].
>
>It is on Mac :-)
Well the build isn't clean on OSX.
>>>
In file included
PETSc can build MUMPS. Why not Python? :-)
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
>
> > print '* Python is easy to install for end users or
> sys-admin. *'
> > print '* http://www.python.org/download/
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> Note: most of our nightlybuild machines are using ubuntu 12.04 - which
> defaults to python-2.6
Ops - ubuntu 12.04 has python-2.7. My mistake.
Satish
Barry Smith writes:
>But, based on the data I have to agree with you. I am fine with moving the
> python required version up to 2.6
Woohoo. This also means it is feasible to make BuildSystem support
python3 from a common codebase.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
> On Oct 13, 2015, at 6:50 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
>
>> print '* Python is easy to install for end users or sys-admin.
>> *'
>> print '* http://www.python.org/download/
>> *'
>
>
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
> print '* Python is easy to install for end users or sys-admin.
> *'
> print '* http://www.python.org/download/
> *'
Actually I don't think python is trivial for most end-users to ins
> On Oct 13, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> Sorry - I was looking at the wrong date - and ended up captured e-mail
> from sept 2013.
>
> Here are the numbers for e-mail starting aug-2014.
>
> 10 2.4
> 162 2.6
>
A couple more numbers for python-2.4 logs.
The 10 logs are from 7 machines:
6 RHEL5 [or clone]
1 SUSE [?? version]
Satish
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> Sorry - I was looking at the wrong date - and ended up captured e-mail
> from sept 2013.
>
> Here are the numbers for e-mail s
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> Sorry - I was looking at the wrong date - and ended up captured e-mail
> from sept 2013.
>
> Here are the numbers for e-mail starting aug-2014.
>
> 10 2.4
> 162 2.6
> 310 2.7
>
I would trade 2% of support requests for parallel c
Sorry - I was looking at the wrong date - and ended up captured e-mail
from sept 2013.
Here are the numbers for e-mail starting aug-2014.
10 2.4
162 2.6
310 2.7
Total: 482
Satish
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> For emails starting from sept 2014 - I have 865 configure.
For emails starting from sept 2014 - I have 865 configure.log files
[with python version listed].
Here is the count for various versions:
28 2.4
284 2.6
553 2.7
Note: most of our nightlybuild machines are using ubuntu 12.04 - which defaults
to python-2.6
Satish
On Tue, 13 Oct 20
Satish,
Can you check all the configure.log files we have received in that last year
for the python version? If a vanishing small number are below 2.7 we can make
2.7 the minimum requirement. Or 2.6 With your pine mail you should be able to
write a python3 script in just a few minutes to
forgot some refs for rhel
https://access.redhat.com/articles/3078
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/
Satish
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Satish Balay wrote:
> Previously - I've used the currently supported RHEL as a base case.
>
> Since RHEL5 is still currently supported -and it
Previously - I've used the currently supported RHEL as a base case.
Since RHEL5 is still currently supported -and it defaults to
python-2.4 we've used python-2.4 as the minimum for petsc configure.
However its 8 years old - [and now RHEL had much longer lifecycle 11+
years - in extended-support m
This depends on what (prehistoric) distributions of Linux are still commonly
used that only have 2.4. In our experience many users still use very old
distributions and asking them to "upgrade" is not likely to be successful since
the users don't control the machines they use.
This is why
Honest question. I've got some changes in buildsystem
(tisaac/buildsystem-feature-parallel) that heavily use the
with-statement context manager introduced in python 2.5.
Cheers,
Toby
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
29 matches
Mail list logo
