Python min version bumped from 2.4+ to 2.5+
cvs-src at yandex.ru
Tue Aug 30 14:26:13 UTC 2011
Greg Larkin wrote on 30.08.2011 17:56:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On 8/30/11 9:38 AM, Ruslan Mahmatkhanov wrote:
>> Greg Larkin wrote on 30.08.2011 17:05:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> Hi Martin,
>>> I have a question about a commit you made in February 2011:
>>> Part of the commit changed:
>>> USE_PYTHON= 2.4+
>>> USE_PYTHON= 2.5+
>>> Was there a specific reason for doing so? I am running various
>>> tinderbox builds to check on port usage of the USE_PYTHON variable, and
>>> I noticed that devel/py-setuptools no longer builds if Python 2.4 is
>>> I'd like to restore that capability, but before I send a PR, I wanted to
>>> check with you first.
>>> Thank you,
>>> - --
>>> Greg Larkin
>>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve
>>> http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code.
>>> http://twitter.com/cpucycle/ - Follow you, follow me
>> I'm sorry for sail in, but i think that the reason is that python24 is
>> reached it's EOL long time ago. Actually the only supported python
>> releases atm according to python.org are - 2.7.2 and 3.2.1, and
>> developers highly encourages the users to move to this versions.
>> 2.5 and 2.6 are in security-fix-only mode, there will be no ANY releases
>> for this branches after October 2011 and October 2013 respectively,
>> while 2.4 does not get security-fixes even.
>> There is also this answer from Martin in this pr:
>> python24 goes to the end of month, this port is on the todo for removal
> Hi Ruslan,
> Ok, thank you for the explanation. Shall I mark python24 for removal
> from the tree or file a PR for python@ to do it?
It's not so easy actually, since we have many ports in the tree that
still depend on 2.4 (notably all that zope/plone stuff) and i believe it
was the reason why python24 still not be removed in the first place.
I do some work about eliminating python24 usage in the tree (yesterdays
py-pysqlite2x stuff - one of it), but it's not that fast. I also working
on porting zope2.13/plone4 (that supports python 2.6 and 2.7) and i'm
planing to finish it this weekend after proper testing. After that we
can deprecate/remove existing zope/plone (not longer supported upstream).
> FYI, I have been running tinderbox builds with PYTHON_VERSION and
> PYTHON_DEFAULT_VERSION set to python2.4, python2.5, etc. to find out if
> ports with USE_PYTHON=yes need to be constrained a bit more.
Yes, there is a lot of work. We have USE_PYTHON with bogus values like
1.5+, 1.6+, 2.0+ etc :). And most of python ports will not work with
python3x so they should be constrained with -2.7 too.
> I figured that python2.4 was supported since it was still in the tree
> and wasn't marked for removal yet, but I admin that I didn't check
> python.org for confirmation.
As i already stated, i believe it's still there because there is
dependent ports. And as far i know in linux world noone shipping
python24 this days. Even RHEL/CentOS finally switched to 2.6.5 in their
> - --
> Greg Larkin
> http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve
> http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code.
> http://twitter.com/cpucycle/ - Follow you, follow me
Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
More information about the freebsd-ports