Bug#937085: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
Hi, On 01-08-2022 21:36, Paul Gevers wrote: On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 10:37:25 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?H=c3=a5vard_F=2e_Aasen?= wrote: I have continued working on the redland-bindings package, cleaned it up a bit, and enabled the Python 3 testsuite. I created an MR [1]. I believe redland-bindings is ready to be uploaded to NEW/unstable. I just uploaded it to NEW/experimental. Which means that once accepted we can iron out mozilla-devscripts there too. It seems I screwed up and uploaded to unstable. Benjamin, Håvard, do you prefer it that I fix this and upload my changes to experimental and reinstate the version in unstable, or are you happy to take it from here? paul@mulciber ~ $ reverse-depends -b mozilla-devscripts Reverse-Testsuite-Triggers * devscripts Reverse-Build-Depends * autofill-forms Not in testing * devscripts Only a BD, the binary only has a Recommends. * dispmua * mozilla-noscript Not in testing * tinyjsd Not in testing * tree-style-tab * umatrix Not in testing Are those two packages in testing really still worth all this? (Just asking, no opinion). Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#937085: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
Hi Håvard, all, On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 10:37:25 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?H=c3=a5vard_F=2e_Aasen?= wrote: I have continued working on the redland-bindings package, cleaned it up a bit, and enabled the Python 3 testsuite. I created an MR [1]. I believe redland-bindings is ready to be uploaded to NEW/unstable. I just uploaded it to NEW/experimental. Which means that once accepted we can iron out mozilla-devscripts there too. > To test that the Python 3 migration did not break anything, I would > take a bunch of webext package (that build depend on mozilla- > devscripts) and rebuild them (once with the current package and once > with the Python 3 port). Then use diffoscope to compare the content of > the two builds to be identical (same generated dependencies, same > paths, etc). That should give us confidence to not break anything. Did I look in the wrong place? when doing: $ apt-cache rdepends mozilla-devscripts Reverse Depends: devscripts Which is only in the suggests section. You need the reverse *build* depends. paul@mulciber ~ $ reverse-depends -b mozilla-devscripts Reverse-Testsuite-Triggers * devscripts Reverse-Build-Depends * autofill-forms * devscripts * dispmua * mozilla-noscript * tinyjsd * tree-style-tab * umatrix Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#937085: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
Hi Jann, Am Montag, den 31.08.2020, 22:58 +0200 schrieb Jann Haber: > Hi all, > > I just updated the MR on Salsa for redland-bindings, it now > successfully creates a python3-librdf package instead of the python- > librdf package. This change still needs to be tested, however it > looks good, since the build process runs without obvious errors. The > upload to unstable I assume needs to be done together with mozilla- > devscripts, once it is also converted to python3. Thanks for working on it. > Benjamin, you have done some work on mozilla-devscripts and got stuck > since redland-bindings were python2 only. I checked if I had code locally and found two commits (one work in progress) for the Python 3 migration. I pushed both into the "python3" branch on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/webext-team/webext-devscripts/-/commits/python3 Feel free to pick that up and finish it. > Can you provide any insight on how to test the new package properly? > What would be the next steps for mozilla-devscripts? Next steps would be: Finish the Python 3 migration of mozilla- devscripts from the "python3" branch. Check that the package builds (IIRC it runs some Python code checker on build). To test that the Python 3 migration did not break anything, I would take a bunch of webext package (that build depend on mozilla- devscripts) and rebuild them (once with the current package and once with the Python 3 port). Then use diffoscope to compare the content of the two builds to be identical (same generated dependencies, same paths, etc). That should give us confidence to not break anything. -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer
Bug#937085: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
Hi all, I just updated the MR on Salsa for redland-bindings, it now successfully creates a python3-librdf package instead of the python-librdf package. This change still needs to be tested, however it looks good, since the build process runs without obvious errors. The upload to unstable I assume needs to be done together with mozilla-devscripts, once it is also converted to python3. Benjamin, you have done some work on mozilla-devscripts and got stuck since redland-bindings were python2 only. Can you provide any insight on how to test the new package properly? What would be the next steps for mozilla-devscripts? Best Regards, Jann On Sun, 30 Aug 2020 10:45:15 +0200 Jann Haber wrote: > I created an MR on Salsa to drive this a little bit forward. I found in the > output of configure, that it reported python -> no. This is likely the cause > of the python bindings missing later. The MR contains a patch to make > configure use python3. Then the compilation does not fail anymore. > > I however still don't think it works correctly - dh_missing reports there are > missing files and 0 files in the python3 package. I'm not so experienced in > packaging, so I was unable to fix this, but maybe the finding above help > somebody else :) > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/redland-bindings/-/merge_requests/1 > > On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:47:36 -0500 Daniel Kahn Gillmor > wrote: > > On Sun 2019-11-03 22:50:59 +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > > I ported amo-changelog and xpi-repack to Python 3 in version 0.54, but I > > > wasn't able to port all scripts, because there is no Python 3 version of > > > redland-bindings (see Debian bug #780741). > > > > Afaict, upstream redland-bindings claims to support python3: > > http://librdf.org/bindings/RELEASE.html#rel1_0_17_1 > > > > see also http://bugs.librdf.org/mantis/view.php?id=549 > > > > but this is from many years ago, and afaict, there has been no > > additional work upstream on redland bindings since then. > > > > Worse, i've been unable to make any of this build against python3. You > > can see my (failed) attempts at preparing an NMU. I've published them > > to salsa on the WIP-python3 branch at > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/redland-bindings if anyone wants to try > > to improve. > > > > So at any rate, i don't see how to get a python3-librdf package easily > > into debian to unblock the mozilla-devscripts transition to python3. > > But i do note that python3-rdflib has been in debian for a > > while. (that's a totally different RDF python module) > > > > I haven't looked into it myself, but perhaps mozilla-devscripts could > > drop the use of redland and use rdflib instead? > > > > Sorry to not have more effective progress to suggest. I'm probably not > > going to have time to work more on this, but i wanted to note where i > > got to, and where i got stuck if someone else wants to pick it up. > > > > --dkg > >
Bug#937085: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
I created an MR on Salsa to drive this a little bit forward. I found in the output of configure, that it reported python -> no. This is likely the cause of the python bindings missing later. The MR contains a patch to make configure use python3. Then the compilation does not fail anymore. I however still don't think it works correctly - dh_missing reports there are missing files and 0 files in the python3 package. I'm not so experienced in packaging, so I was unable to fix this, but maybe the finding above help somebody else :) https://salsa.debian.org/debian/redland-bindings/-/merge_requests/1 On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:47:36 -0500 Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Sun 2019-11-03 22:50:59 +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > I ported amo-changelog and xpi-repack to Python 3 in version 0.54, but I > > wasn't able to port all scripts, because there is no Python 3 version of > > redland-bindings (see Debian bug #780741). > > Afaict, upstream redland-bindings claims to support python3: > http://librdf.org/bindings/RELEASE.html#rel1_0_17_1 > > see also http://bugs.librdf.org/mantis/view.php?id=549 > > but this is from many years ago, and afaict, there has been no > additional work upstream on redland bindings since then. > > Worse, i've been unable to make any of this build against python3. You > can see my (failed) attempts at preparing an NMU. I've published them > to salsa on the WIP-python3 branch at > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/redland-bindings if anyone wants to try > to improve. > > So at any rate, i don't see how to get a python3-librdf package easily > into debian to unblock the mozilla-devscripts transition to python3. > But i do note that python3-rdflib has been in debian for a > while. (that's a totally different RDF python module) > > I haven't looked into it myself, but perhaps mozilla-devscripts could > drop the use of redland and use rdflib instead? > > Sorry to not have more effective progress to suggest. I'm probably not > going to have time to work more on this, but i wanted to note where i > got to, and where i got stuck if someone else wants to pick it up. > > --dkg
Bug#780741: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
On Sun 2019-11-03 22:50:59 +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote: > I ported amo-changelog and xpi-repack to Python 3 in version 0.54, but I > wasn't able to port all scripts, because there is no Python 3 version of > redland-bindings (see Debian bug #780741). Afaict, upstream redland-bindings claims to support python3: http://librdf.org/bindings/RELEASE.html#rel1_0_17_1 see also http://bugs.librdf.org/mantis/view.php?id=549 but this is from many years ago, and afaict, there has been no additional work upstream on redland bindings since then. Worse, i've been unable to make any of this build against python3. You can see my (failed) attempts at preparing an NMU. I've published them to salsa on the WIP-python3 branch at https://salsa.debian.org/debian/redland-bindings if anyone wants to try to improve. So at any rate, i don't see how to get a python3-librdf package easily into debian to unblock the mozilla-devscripts transition to python3. But i do note that python3-rdflib has been in debian for a while. (that's a totally different RDF python module) I haven't looked into it myself, but perhaps mozilla-devscripts could drop the use of redland and use rdflib instead? Sorry to not have more effective progress to suggest. I'm probably not going to have time to work more on this, but i wanted to note where i got to, and where i got stuck if someone else wants to pick it up. --dkg signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#937085: mozilla-devscripts: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye
block 937085 by 780741 thanks Hi, I ported amo-changelog and xpi-repack to Python 3 in version 0.54, but I wasn't able to port all scripts, because there is no Python 3 version of redland-bindings (see Debian bug #780741). -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer
