On 07/02/2019 00.41, Ned Deily wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2019, at 18:28, Steve Dower wrote:
>> On 06Feb2019 1423, Christian Heimes wrote:
>>> Do you want to update Python 3.8 (master) only or also 3.7? I'm not
>>> strictly against updating 3.7. However we have traditionally kept the
>>> OpenSSL version
test_load_default_certs_env_windows fails on win32 and amd64 retail. skipped
on debug
-Original Message-
From: Steve Dower
Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 3:28 PM
To: Christian Heimes ; Paul Monson
; python-dev@python.org; Ned Deily
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] CPython on Windows ARM32
On 06Feb2019 1423
On Feb 6, 2019, at 18:28, Steve Dower wrote:
> On 06Feb2019 1423, Christian Heimes wrote:
>> Do you want to update Python 3.8 (master) only or also 3.7? I'm not
>> strictly against updating 3.7. However we have traditionally kept the
>> OpenSSL version of each branch stable. 1.1.1 comes with new
On 06Feb2019 1423, Christian Heimes wrote:
Do you want to update Python 3.8 (master) only or also 3.7? I'm not
strictly against updating 3.7. However we have traditionally kept the
OpenSSL version of each branch stable. 1.1.1 comes with new features,
stricter security settings and some ciphers
On 06/02/2019 02.09, Paul Monson via Python-Dev wrote:
> Updating OpenSSL and libffi are independent of ARM support but need to
> be done as prerequisites. OpenSSL 1.1.0 doesn't have support for ARM32
> on Windows but OpenSSL 1.1.1 does.
>
>
>
> I have OpenSSL 1.1.1a ready to check in to
compiler bug, could be replaced with #pragma
optimize around entire function.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Dower
Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 11:16 AM
To: Terry Reedy ; python-dev@python.org; Paul Monson
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] CPython on Windows ARM32
On 06Feb2019 0054, Terry
On 06Feb2019 0054, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 2/5/2019 10:10 PM, Zachary Ware wrote:
I'm all for the first two changes (especially the second), and if 10
years of pledged corporate support for a new platform is the price we
have to pay for them, I'm ok with that :).
I would expect that the main
On 2/5/2019 10:10 PM, Zachary Ware wrote:
I'm all for the first two changes (especially the second), and if 10
years of pledged corporate support for a new platform is the price we
have to pay for them, I'm ok with that :).
I would expect that the main question should be the density of
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 7:37 PM Steve Dower wrote:
> I also haven't reviewed the changes yet, but provided nobody is strongly
> opposed to taking on a supported platform (without additional releases
> on python.org), I expect I'll do a big part of the reviewing then.
I'm all for the first two
Just confirming for the list that I'm aware of this and supportive, but
am not the dedicated support for this effort.
I also haven't reviewed the changes yet, but provided nobody is strongly
opposed to taking on a supported platform (without additional releases
on python.org), I expect I'll do a
Hi Python Developers,
I'm Paul Monson, I've spent about 20 years working with embedded software.
Since 2010 I've worked for Microsoft as a developer.
Our team is working with CPython on Azure IoT Edge devices that run on
x64-based devices.
We would like to extend that support to
11 matches
Mail list logo
