Hi Sean, On 04/12/12 00:28, Sean Silva wrote:> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> The gcc compile farm currently only has python 2.4 and 2.5. I know Duncan is >> using it quiet extensively, especially all dragonegg buildbots run on it. >> >> I very much agree we should ensure our python scripts are valid python 2.7 >> and as close as possible to python 3.x. However, as Daniel pointed out, >> there are still users of older python versions around. We could probably >> require them to upgrade, but I would like to avoid this, if we >> can support older python versions without too much trouble. > > Duncan, sorry for roping you into this thread, but it seems that your > bots are basically the only concrete need that has been voiced for > supporting End-of-life'd (2.4, 2.5) Python versions. Do you have any > plans for bringing those bots up to 2.6 or 2.7?most of the bots are running 2.5.2, because that's the system python version (Debian lenny). I don't have any control over the O/S version, so I would have to install a more recent python version locally. Personally I think it is wise to have buildbots running on older systems, since I reckon that there are many people running oldish systems out there. Lenny came out in 2009, and was the latest stable Debian release until 6 months ago, so it's not even that old. If it wouldn't take> you a long time, I think it would be beneficial to update so that our > Python code can be made Python2+Python3 compatible; Arch Linux and I > believe Ubuntu 12.10 ship with Python3 as /usr/bin/python by default, > so being able to coexist with both is important.What is the reason for upgrading? Is there a problem with python 2.4/2.5 that can't be worked around? Ciao, Duncan.
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:> Lenny came out in 2009, and > was the latest stable Debian release until 6 months ago, so it's not even > that > old.To put that in perspective, Lenny was released around r64555. That's pretty old. On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:> What is the reason for upgrading? Is there a problem with python 2.4/2.5 > that > can't be worked around?See my reply to Tobi just a minute ago. People with python3 as their /usr/bin/python are forced "install another Python locally" as well. Given the choice of making it easy for someone running a fully supported version of the Python language or for someone running a long-dead and unsupported version of the language, I think the choice is clear. I'm pretty sure that the effort is "significant" to support back to 2.4/2.5 while supporting python3. -- Sean Silva
Hi Sean, On 04/12/12 03:33, Sean Silva wrote:> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> Lenny came out in 2009, and >> was the latest stable Debian release until 6 months ago, so it's not even >> that >> old. > > To put that in perspective, Lenny was released around r64555. That's pretty old.it's not old in terms of operating system releases. The fact it is old in terms of LLVM versions doesn't seem very relevant to me.> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: >> What is the reason for upgrading? Is there a problem with python 2.4/2.5 >> that >> can't be worked around? > > See my reply to Tobi just a minute ago. People with python3 as their > /usr/bin/python are forced "install another Python locally" as well. > Given the choice of making it easy for someone running a fully > supported version of the Python language or for someone running a > long-dead and unsupported version of the language, I think the choice > is clear. I'm pretty sure that the effort is "significant" to support > back to 2.4/2.5 while supporting python3.OK, if it is really a binary choice between supporting python3 and supporting 2.4/2.5 then I too vote for python3. But is it really all or nothing, I mean: how painful is it to support every version, did you try or are you guestimating? Ciao, Duncan.
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 02:49:27 +0100 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: Lenny came out in 2009, and was the latest> stable Debian release until 6 months ago, so it's not even that old. >actually squeeze came out in February 2011, more than an year and an half ago, and wheezy is in freeze... support for lenny was dropped recently http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2012/02/msg00799.html -- Francesco Berni - kurojishi Registered Linux User #512920 GPG: A1FB5252 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121204/0b0dc219/attachment.sig>