#11549: Review dependencies on Python 2
-----------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: pierre.labastie | Owner: blfs-book
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone: x-future
Component: BOOK | Version: SVN
Severity: normal | Resolution:
Keywords: Python 2 |
-----------------------------+------------------------
Comment (by ken@…):
Replying to [comment:23 pierre.labastie]:
> Replying to [comment:21 ken@…]:
> > Replying to [comment:20 pierre.labastie]:
> > > Confirmed that if gdb is ''not'' installed, and P2 is not present,
there are 4 test failures in rustc.
> >
> > Can you be specific about which is the fourth, and is it different
from the three certain and one possible already specified ?
>
> No it's not different: the four failures are issues 37131, 49851 and
50993, and sysroot-crates-are-unstable. The latter uses a python script,
which explicitly requires python2.7.
>
And all my desktop builds/upgrades build python2 at a very early stage,
yet I have occasionally seen that failure (and I definitely had it with
1.32.0 and system llvm-7 on my phenom, although that install appeared to
be usable).
Also, as to the gdb failures you mentioned earlier, I got those on another
machine when updating 8.3, in that case python-2.7.15 was definitely
installed when gdb-8.1.1 was installed, so I assumed that gdb-6.1.1 was
probably too old for the tests.
I'll add a comment that three gdb tests can fail, but I'm waiting for
Bruce to merge his changes.
> >
> > As to building rustc without python3 - we did, for a while. I reverted
back to python2 on 6th January, because of #11520. That was with 1.31.1.
As I noted earlier, fedora have a patch for python3 for (I think) only one
of the rust files. Somebody, probably Thanos, pointed out that some of the
rustc scripts specify 2.7 (I think) - can't find the mail in the archive,
it was probably early this month.
>
> Well, this seems to work for this version of rust. Fedora's patch does
not seem to be needed. It is in a lldb_something file, and I do not think
our build makes lldb usable. I'll try building firefox and let you know if
it works. Note that if changing the python version is enough to generate
SIGSEV, it means that there are severe flaws in the build system... The
python scripts are supposed to run compilation commands, not to define
memory locations...
Personally, I have very poor experience of all python build-systems, and I
have not found that 3 is necessarily better. Both x.py and mach havefailed
for me in odd ways (x.py with both 2 and 3, mach still definitely needs
2).
But I'm not sure that I associate the change from 2 to 3 with SIGSEGV -
testing 1.32.0 has been unpleasant, I've forgotten a lot of the details
and I'm probably confused about the order in which I tried certain things,
but for me the rust tests which failed unexpectedly with SIGSEGV were when
using system LLVM-7.
--
Ticket URL: <http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/11549#comment:24>
BLFS Trac <http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs>
Beyond Linux From Scratch
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-book
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
