Michael Felt <aixto...@felt.demon.nl> added the comment:
Yes, it is less hacky - and something to pursue later - as a better solution. Even the idea of perhaps no longer needing makexp_aix and/or ld_so_aix and python.exp is much better solution. However, the goal of this PR is to have something now - that removes the pain (e.g., false bot failures and bot report storage impact) asap. Many thanks for looking - and commenting! On 15/06/2020 16:34, Kevin wrote: > Kevin <kad...@us.ibm.com> added the comment: > > This seems to be a duplicate of https://bugs.python.org/issue19521 > > The PR for that one seems a little less hacky since it uses make rules to > prevent duplication instead of lock files. > > ---------- > nosy: +kadler > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <https://bugs.python.org/issue40424> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue40424> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
