Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 21 May 2001 08:36:02 -0700 | From | Tom Rini <> | Subject | Re: [kbuild-devel] Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up |
| |
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 11:58:34AM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: > >>>>> "Jakob" == Jakob ?stergaard <jakob@unthought.net> 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) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |