Re: Propose requiring Python 3.4 or later for building glibc.

2018-10-24 Thread Carlos O'Donell 
On 10/24/18 4:37 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> 
>>> Carlos, do you agree we have consensus on the Python 3.4 requirement (the 
>>> patch  to add 
>>> that requirement still needs to be reviewed)?
>>  
>> I agree we have consensus and that the distribution maintainer are
>> sufficiently aware of the change that they will have time to adjust
>> before the release on February 1st.
> 
> Thanks.  I've now committed the patch to use gen-libm-test.py to generate 
> the ulps table for the manual (which the above referenced patch builds 
> on).

I'm glad to see this move forward. Thank you very much for doing this
work.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Propose requiring Python 3.4 or later for building glibc.

2018-10-24 Thread Joseph Myers 
On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> > Carlos, do you agree we have consensus on the Python 3.4 requirement (the 
> > patch  to add 
> > that requirement still needs to be reviewed)?
>  
> I agree we have consensus and that the distribution maintainer are
> sufficiently aware of the change that they will have time to adjust
> before the release on February 1st.

Thanks.  I've now committed the patch to use gen-libm-test.py to generate 
the ulps table for the manual (which the above referenced patch builds 
on).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: Propose requiring Python 3.4 or later for building glibc.

2018-10-24 Thread Carlos O'Donell 
On 10/24/18 1:43 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Helmut Grohne wrote:
>>
>>> Daniel Schepler is working on a native bootstrap approach. As far as I
>>> understand, he natively bootstraps Debian from non-Debian (same
>>> processor architecure and kernel). I expect that his work will be
>>> impacted by the proposed change. I've added him to Cc to let him speak
>>> up.
>>
>> Daniel, any comments?  I believe we have all the other distribution 
>> responses required for reaching consensus on this issue.
> 
> My attention has been drawn to a reply at 
>  that didn't 
> go to libc-alpha.
> 
> Carlos, do you agree we have consensus on the Python 3.4 requirement (the 
> patch  to add 
> that requirement still needs to be reviewed)?
 
I agree we have consensus and that the distribution maintainer are
sufficiently aware of the change that they will have time to adjust
before the release on February 1st.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.

Re: Propose requiring Python 3.4 or later for building glibc.

2018-10-24 Thread Joseph Myers 
On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> 
> > Daniel Schepler is working on a native bootstrap approach. As far as I
> > understand, he natively bootstraps Debian from non-Debian (same
> > processor architecure and kernel). I expect that his work will be
> > impacted by the proposed change. I've added him to Cc to let him speak
> > up.
> 
> Daniel, any comments?  I believe we have all the other distribution 
> responses required for reaching consensus on this issue.

My attention has been drawn to a reply at 
 that didn't 
go to libc-alpha.

Carlos, do you agree we have consensus on the Python 3.4 requirement (the 
patch  to add 
that requirement still needs to be reviewed)?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com

Re: Propose requiring Python 3.4 or later for building glibc.

2018-10-24 Thread Joseph Myers 
On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Helmut Grohne wrote:

> Daniel Schepler is working on a native bootstrap approach. As far as I
> understand, he natively bootstraps Debian from non-Debian (same
> processor architecure and kernel). I expect that his work will be
> impacted by the proposed change. I've added him to Cc to let him speak
> up.

Daniel, any comments?  I believe we have all the other distribution 
responses required for reaching consensus on this issue.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com