Re: [Python-Dev] bugs.python.org - outage 08/09/17 until 8:00pm PST

[Terry Reedy]

On 8/9/2017 7:12 PM, MRAB wrote:

On 2017-08-09 23:18, Mark Mangoba wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I was just informed from our hosting provider for bugs.python.org 
, Hetzner Online - that the server is 
currently being migrated to a new data center.


Unfortunately I was not informed ahead of time and working with the 
provider to better communicate and schedule future maintenance periods 
accordingly.


Apologies for any inconvenience this has caused.  I will be posting 
status updates at https://status.python.org/.


As many of you know, we are working to migrate this off the current 
hosting provider in the next 3 months.


Please could you use a date/time format that's more international, such 
as ISO 8601.


I presume that would be something like 2017-08-10 04:00:00 UTC.

--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] bugs.python.org - outage 08/09/17 until 8:00pm PST

[MRAB]

On 2017-08-09 23:18, Mark Mangoba wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

I was just informed from our hosting provider for bugs.python.org 
, Hetzner Online - that the server is currently 
being migrated to a new data center.


Unfortunately I was not informed ahead of time and working with the 
provider to better communicate and schedule future maintenance periods 
accordingly.


Apologies for any inconvenience this has caused.  I will be posting 
status updates at https://status.python.org/.


As many of you know, we are working to migrate this off the current 
hosting provider in the next 3 months.


Please could you use a date/time format that's more international, such 
as ISO 8601.

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Python-Dev] bugs.python.org - outage 08/09/17 until 8:00pm PST

[Mark Mangoba]

Dear Colleagues,

I was just informed from our hosting provider for bugs.python.org 
, Hetzner Online - that the server is currently being 
migrated to a new data center.

Unfortunately I was not informed ahead of time and working with the provider to 
better communicate and schedule future maintenance periods accordingly.

Apologies for any inconvenience this has caused.  I will be posting status 
updates at https://status.python.org/ .

As many of you know, we are working to migrate this off the current hosting 
provider in the next 3 months.

Best regards,
Mark 

Mark Mangoba | PSF IT Manager | Python Software Foundation | 
mmang...@python.org | python.org | Infrastructure Staff:  
infrastructure-st...@python.org | GPG: 2DE4 D92B 739C 649B EBB8 CCF6 DC05 E024 
5F4C A0D1




___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Python-Dev] bugs.python.org appears down

[Terry Reedy]

And not just for me, for last couple of hours.
http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/bugs.python.org

---
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto

[Nick Coghlan]

On 9 August 2017 at 17:52, Antoine Pitrou  wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
> Nick Coghlan  wrote:
>> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith  wrote:
>> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
>> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
>> > altering configure.ac and Makefile.pre.in to make such a change.
>>
>> Being able to separate them seems useful even if it's just from the
>> performance research perspective of comparing "PGO only", "LTO only"
>> and "PGO+LTO".
>
> That does not mean "LTO only" deserves a configure option, though.  PGO
> is difficult to set up manually so it's fair that we provide dedicated
> build support for it.  LTO should just be a matter of tweaking CFLAGS
> and LDFLAGS.

I wouldn't be confident in my own ability to get those right for gcc,
let alone getting them right for clang as well. Whereas if the
"--with-lto" configure option just works, then I'd never need to worry
about it :)

It also means that if folks *do* investigate this, it eliminates a
class of configuration bugs (i.e. "you didn't actually enable LTO
correctly in your testing").

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto

[Victor Stinner]

2017-08-09 11:22 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou :
> What are the reasons it is ignored?  IIRC some compilers have buggy LTO
> support and it can lead to crashes during compilation.

Issues with LTO:
http://bugs.python.org/issue28032
http://bugs.python.org/issue28605

But since --with-lto is now an opt-in option, I don't why it should
ignored when PGO is not used?

Victor
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:16:36 +0200
Victor Stinner  wrote:
> There is already a ./configure --with-lto flag, why not using it?
> 
> I'm using --with-lto without PGO for months, I never noticed that the
> option is fully ignored!

What are the reasons it is ignored?  IIRC some compilers have buggy LTO
support and it can lead to crashes during compilation.

Regards

Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto

[Victor Stinner]

There is already a ./configure --with-lto flag, why not using it?

I'm using --with-lto without PGO for months, I never noticed that the
option is fully ignored!

Victor

2017-08-09 9:52 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou :
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
> Nick Coghlan  wrote:
>> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith  wrote:
>> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
>> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
>> > altering configure.ac and Makefile.pre.in to make such a change.
>>
>> Being able to separate them seems useful even if it's just from the
>> performance research perspective of comparing "PGO only", "LTO only"
>> and "PGO+LTO".
>
> That does not mean "LTO only" deserves a configure option, though.  PGO
> is difficult to set up manually so it's fair that we provide dedicated
> build support for it.  LTO should just be a matter of tweaking CFLAGS
> and LDFLAGS.
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.stinner%40gmail.com
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Interrupt thread.join() with Ctrl-C / KeyboardInterrupt on Windows

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 14:29:41 -0700
Steve Dower  wrote:
> On 08Aug2017 1151, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > It looks like Thread.join ultimately ends up blocking in
> > Python/thread_nt.h:EnterNonRecursiveMutex, which has a maze of #ifdefs
> > behind it -- I think there are 3 different implementation you might
> > end up with, depending on how CPython was built? Two of them seem to
> > ultimately block in WaitForSingleObject, which would be easy to adapt
> > to handle control-C. Unfortunately I think the implementation that
> > actually gets used on modern systems is the one that blocks in
> > SleepConditionVariableSRW, and I don't see any easy way for a
> > control-C to interrupt that. But maybe I'm missing something -- I'm
> > not a Windows expert.  
> 
> I'd have to dig back through the recent attempts at changing this, but I 
> believe the SleepConditionVariableSRW path is unused for all versions of 
> Windows.
> 
> A couple of people (including myself) attempted to enable that code 
> path, but it has some subtle issues that were causing test failures, so 
> we abandoned all the attempts. Though ISTR that someone put in more 
> effort than most of us, but I don't think we've merged it (and if we 
> have, it'd only be in 3.7 at this stage).

For the record, there are issues open for this:

- locks not interruptible on Windows:
https://bugs.python.org/issue29971
- enable optimized locks on Windows:
https://bugs.python.org/issue29871

Having Lock.acquire() be interruptible would be really nice as it's the
basis for so many of our synchronization primitives (including
Thread.join(), I believe).

Regards

Antoine.


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto

[Antoine Pitrou]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
Nick Coghlan  wrote:
> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith  wrote:
> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
> > altering configure.ac and Makefile.pre.in to make such a change.  
> 
> Being able to separate them seems useful even if it's just from the
> performance research perspective of comparing "PGO only", "LTO only"
> and "PGO+LTO".

That does not mean "LTO only" deserves a configure option, though.  PGO
is difficult to set up manually so it's fair that we provide dedicated
build support for it.  LTO should just be a matter of tweaking CFLAGS
and LDFLAGS.

Regards

Antoine.


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 3.4.7 is now available

[Larry Hastings]

On behalf of the Python development community and the Python 3.4 release 
team, I'm pleased to announce the availability of Python 3.4.7.


Python 3.4 is now in "security fixes only" mode.  This is the final 
stage of support for Python 3.4.  Python 3.4 now only receives security 
fixes, not bug fixes, and Python 3.4 releases are source code only--no 
more official binary installers will be produced.



You can find Python 3.4.7 here:

   https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-347/



Happy Pythoning,


//arry/
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com