| 1 |
I think problem is more global: |
| 2 |
* many python3_6 packages dont have python3_7 keywords, because its |
| 3 |
maintainers dont bother about it. So if you want to switch to python3_7 you |
| 4 |
still need manualy add python3_7 use for many packages (that actualy work |
| 5 |
without problems |
| 6 |
* we need policy for python packages that force enablement of new python |
| 7 |
version on existing packages. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
В письме от четверг, 14 ноября 2019 г. 00:16:10 MSK пользователь Michał Górny |
| 10 |
написал: |
| 11 |
> Hi, |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I'd like to share my frustration at the state of Python in general, |
| 14 |
> and Python packages in Gentoo. So I'd like to 'bootstrap' python3_8 -- |
| 15 |
> that is, add it to the most common dependency, dev-python/setuptools. |
| 16 |
> Simple thing, right? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> 1. There's no such thing as trivial dependency graph in Python. If you |
| 20 |
> think that setuptools has a few deps, you're entirely wrong. I actually |
| 21 |
> had to write a tool to even assemble list of deps to start with, |
| 22 |
> and the number is: 174. I mean, in order to enable py3.8 on setuptools, |
| 23 |
> you have to enable it on at least 173 other packages. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Sure, some of those packages are just doc-deps or test-deps, and some |
| 26 |
> could be avoided one way or another. However, avoiding them is only |
| 27 |
> temporary and involves more effort than it saves. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> 2. There are some packages that dropped Python 2.7 but still have 2.7 |
| 31 |
> deps. So we need to also add py3.8 to older versions that still has |
| 32 |
> 2.7. Plus, some packages have explicit <-deps. So we need to add 3.8 |
| 33 |
> to them, and hope that the old version will actually work with 3.8, |
| 34 |
> and then to their extra dependencies. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> This is all handiwork. The number is now 178 packages, or 187 ebuilds. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> 3. Of course there are packages with new deps dropping keywords whose |
| 40 |
> maintainers (or bumpers) never bothered filing a keywordreq. Because |
| 41 |
> why bother, somebody else will do that when it blocks everything, |
| 42 |
> right?! |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> Well, guess what. python3_8 flag is going to be masked on non-amd64 |
| 45 |
> because people didn't bother keywording new versions of their packages |
| 46 |
> on other arches. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> If you choose to realize your mistake now, and are willing to fix it, |
| 49 |
> start keywording new versions. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> Here's the initial CI run: |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/13638 |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> The packages haven't been tested yet. If you want to help, feel free to |
| 57 |
> apply it locally, and run tests in all those packages, and try to |
| 58 |
> assemble a reasonably readable report of what fails. Then probably diff |
| 59 |
> the failures against py3.7 because some packages probably fail there |
| 60 |
> as well. |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> Of course many of those packages don't have tests at all. Because it |
| 63 |
> was too much effort, and the four-letter company didn't pay for them. |
| 64 |
> Because it was too hard to use GitHub snapshot over pypi tarball that |
| 65 |
> doesn't bundle tests because obviously nobody wants them. Help with |
| 66 |
> that welcome too. |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> Help with getting rid of py2 revdeps of py3-only packages would be very |
| 69 |
> welcome too. |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> In other words, there's a lot of work to get Python near-sane in Gentoo, |
| 72 |
> and we'd welcome all the help we can get. TIA. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
-- |
| 76 |
Best regards, |
| 77 |
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov |
Archives