[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up
    On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 11:58:34AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
    > >>>>> "Jakob" == Jakob ?stergaard <> writes:
    > Jakob> On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 10:10:49PM -0400, Robert M. Love wrote:
    > >> I think this is a very important point, and one I agree with. I
    > >> tend to let my distribution handle stuff like python. now, I use
    > >> RedHat's on-going devel, RawHide. it is not using python2. in
    > >> fact, since switching to python2 may break old stuff, I don't
    > >> expect python2 until 8.0. that wont be for 9 months. 90% of
    > >> RedHat's configuration tools, et al, are written in python1 and
    > >> they just are not going to change on someone's whim.
    > Jakob> 2.6.0 isn't going to happen for at least a year or two. What's
    > Jakob> the problem ?
    > Jakob> Want 2.5.X ? Get the tools too.
    > Some people grab the latest devel kernels because thats all that works
    > on their hardware.

    And they can grab the latest tools too. Why is this a problem again?
    python1.5.x is compatiable w/ python2 EXCEPT in the cases where the script
    uses undocumented things which did work in python1.5.x. But that's not as
    big of a problem since they can co-exist. Debian already does this (And thus
    CML2 already deals with python2 being called 'python2') and I wouldn't be
    supprised if the PowerTools python2 rpm someone pointed out makes them
    co-exist as well.

    Which brings up another point, RedHat (7.1?) and Debian/woody both have the
    option of having python2 around. Anyone know about mandrake? My point is
    that some dists are already dealing with python2.

    > Jakob> I'm in no position to push people around, but I think the
    > Jakob> whining about CML2 tool requirements is completely unjustified.
    > Jakob> If we required that everything worked with GCC 2.7.2 and nmake,
    > Jakob> where would we be today ? I'm a lot more worried about CML2
    > Jakob> itself than about the tools it requires :)
    > gcc-2.7.2 is broken it miscompiles the kernel, Python1 or bash are
    > not.

    Well no, but python1 requires another 2k lines of python code or so.
    Eric, would it be easy/possible to go back to requiring python 1.5.x for
    CML2, since that is what many dists ship with?

    > Jakob> Whether CML2 requires python2 or not, the distributions will
    > Jakob> change. This is not about Eric pushing something down people's
    > Jakob> throats. Tools evolve, and new revisions introduce
    > Jakob> incompatibilities, but distributions still follow the
    > Jakob> evolution. Nobody ships perl4 today either.
    > The point is that Eric has been trying to push distributions to ship
    > P2.

    Maybe, maybe not. Forgetting about the QA time and whatnot, there's good
    odds that all of the python scripts RedHat (for example) ships will just
    work with python2. I know one of the PPC dists didn't ship with python2
    (which does have a lot of python bits to it) entirely because they were
    already in testing when it came out. It's not something the distros
    can switch to at a whim, but it's also something which shouldn't cause
    them problems when they do.

    Tom Rini (TR1265)
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.025 / U:10.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site