Dear all,
After several months of absence - my first manual build surprised me by
the addition of the -qalias=noansi.
Before I open an issue - maybe it is not that important - I am trying to
find what brought it in. It looks to be a change in behavior in
configure(.ac) - starting with
Hi,
Not clear on where to report this - so I hope someone else sees the same
and can notify whoever needs to be notified.
The main URL for downloads: https://www.python.org/downloads/ Opens with
message :
*Notice:* While Javascript is not essential for this website, your
interaction with
Shortening the original mail to something shorter.
The reason I am starting here, in -dev, rather than as an issue directly, is
because I would like some direction/recommendation from concerned individuals
before I take a "outsider" approach. Too often I have learned that I guessed
wrong how
Congratulations on the official begin of the alpha phase of Python3-3.8.
I hope there will be time to consider three of my PRs so that this phase has at
least one of the AIX buildbots (not mine I fear) is passing all the tests and
can finally serve it’s real purpose and signal when a change
> On 10/30/2018 8:08 AM, Michael Felt wrote:
> I noticed that there was a "custom" build queued for my AIX build-bot last
> week. (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/159/builds/1).
>
> It failed, but I hope that was due to the issue with install.sh.
>
> If it c
I noticed that there was a "custom" build queued for my AIX build-bot last
week. (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/159/builds/1).
It failed, but I hope that was due to the issue with install.sh.
If it could be run again - and if it fails again, please let me know what the
test was,
My short comment: +1
My longer comment: for someone who is not trying to be caught up in "internals"
I find it extremely difficult to work with the "default" approach described
below - trying to mentally understand, and remember what those macros mean/do
as I got "bug-hunting".
Ultimately,
a) I wish I seen this earlier, but I have been away from OSS for the last weeks
as my RL job has priority.
b) to answer a very different question I needed to look at the current (Always
FAIL) status of the the two AIX buildbots - and I saw that 11 days ago they
both started failing with the
Thanks for asking a question that triggered an enlightening discussion!
On 10/25/2018 5:13 PM, Stephane Wirtel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After your feedback, I have my answer.
>
> I understand the your points of view and I don't want to change any part
> of code for os.system and subprocess, I don't
On 10/4/2018 10:30 AM, INADA Naoki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> First of all, congratulations on passing all test on AIX.
>
>> My assumption is that it needs to (at least) pass all tests - and that
>> is why I keep asking for attention. All the PRs to fix individual tests
>> mean less if they are not
On 10/4/2018 9:55 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 10/4/18 9:34 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> If IBM wants a better Python support, it would help a lot if IBM pays
>> for this development.
I agree. If IBM ...
>> ... Antoine Pitrou has been paid in the past to enhance Python
>> support in
In the buildbots AIX is marked as "unstable"? What is needed to get it
marked as a "stable" platform - that being one of my short-term goals.
My assumption is that it needs to (at least) pass all tests - and that
is why I keep asking for attention. All the PRs to fix individual tests
mean less if
On 10/3/2018 1:46 AM, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> On 2018-10-02, Michael Felt wrote:
>> I am sorry, for myself obviously - but also for Python. Obviously, I am
>> doing it all wrong - as I see lots of other issues being picked up
>> immediately.
> I'm not sure that's th
On 10/3/2018 2:48 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/2/2018 7:16 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/2/2018 11:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> On 10/2/2018 12:41 PM, Simon Cross wrote:
>>>> Are there any core devs that Michael or Erik could collaborate
On 10/2/2018 11:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/2/2018 12:41 PM, Simon Cross wrote:
>> Are there any core devs that Michael or Erik could collaborate with?
>> Rather than rely on adhoc patch review from random core developers.
>
> You two might collaborate with each other to the extent of
Yes, unintended. It was only supposed to be signed, but "Send Later"
encrypts it.
Unpacked version:
On 10/2/2018 1:07 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018, at 12:12, Michael Felt wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Before I submit a patch to increase the
On 10/2/2018 4:45 PM, Erik Bray wrote:
> Michael, if there are any PRs you want to point me to that I might be
> able to help review please do.
A little trick I learned:
https://github.com/python/cpython/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+author%3Aaixtools+sort%3Aupdated-desc
lists them all.
What
I am willing to assist as best I can with AIX - I seem to have the core
requirements re: time available: (i.e., over-comitted at work, but
'work' evenings and weekends on OSS :p)
On 10/2/2018 6:41 PM, Simon Cross wrote:
> Are there any core devs that Michael or Erik could collaborate with?
>
mime-attachment
Description: application/pgp-encrypted
encrypted.asc
Description: Binary data
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
Dear core-devs,
I have some bad characteristics.
I can be extremely enthusiastic - and write too much. I have been trying
to not write - anything - worried that my enthusiasm is not matched by
yours, or worse was a reason to ignore my work to get AIX passing all tests.
FYI: since the end of
On 9/30/2018 2:17 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> (It's also called Dutch Rounding.)
Ah - as to why - and from school! (as so-called intuitive! rather desired!).
A test score goes from 5.5 to 6.0 - which becomes passing.
Oh, do I recall my children's frustrations when they had a X.4Y score -
Hi all,
Before I submit a patch to increase the default MAXDATA setting for AIX
when in 32-bit mode - I want to know if I can put this LDFLAG setting in
LDLAST, or if I should introduce a new AC_SUBST() variable (e.g.,
LDMAXDATA).
I have not looked yet, but I was thinking that MAYBE! LDLAST is
Not critical - but I note a difference between Python3 3.6.7 and 3.7.1 -
no support for the configure option --with-openssl.
On AIX I was able to run both configure and "make install" without incident.
I also ran the "make test" command.
v3.7.1:
9 tests failed again:
test_ctypes
When building out of tree there is no .git reference. If I understand the
process it uses git to see what files have changed, and does further processing
on those.
As to workflow, that may be better, but other than the name, unknown to me.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 24 Aug 2018, at 19:37,
etuid (test.test_shutil.TestShutil)
--
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/data/prj/python/git/python3-3.8/Lib/test/test_shutil.py", line
1491, in test_copy_remove_setuid
self.assertEqual(oct(mode), oct(harm
Try again on this.
a) Victor has said he will look, from time to time - after his vacation.
b) our vacations do not overlap
c) comment was also made privately, re: my starting a worker for
buildbot, that there is not much sense in a bot if noone is working on
the tests.
I'll do my best, in the
On 8/6/2018 11:38 AM, Charalampos Stratakis wrote:
> A side note on your side note. Different distro's have different
> standards, use/customer cases to address etc. In enterprise
> distributions the usual scheme is that the version that you see is the
> minimum one and many fixes coming from
Sounds like i can skip this then. Thx.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 1 Aug 2018, at 17:52, Christian Heimes wrote:
>
>> On 2018-08-01 13:58, Michael wrote:
>> a) I am looking at getting spwd integrated from AIX
>>
>> b) only the parameter sp_pwdp is my concern - as AIX really does not
>> want to
On 27/01/2017 22:24, MRAB wrote:
I'm not bothered about it. It's quite a bit bigger than the re module,
and, anyway, keeping it as a third-party module gives me more freedom
to make updates, which are available for a range of Python versions.
I tried packaging it (pip build) and ran into a
On 04-Jun-16 10:12, Sebastian Krause wrote:
Sounds good for features that are well-supported by compilers that
>people use. (Are there other compilers used than just GCC and MSVC?)
Just thought I'd mention that "little ole me" is using IBM vac on AIX
rather than gcc.
This has more to do with
On 26/09/2016 17:41, Guido van Rossum wrote:
The issue tracker is your friend!
I shall remember this for future reference
As you probably noticed - new "issue" https://bugs.python.org/issue28290
-- BETA report: Python-3.6 build messages to stderr: AIX and "not GCC"
On 13/09/2016 02:15, Ned Deily wrote:
the challenge is to put the finishing touches on the features and
documentation, squash bugs, and test test test. The next preview release will
be 3.6.0b2
Found one typo in Modules/_io/_iomodule.h on line 156 - #endif^L rather
than #endif (posted as
I am using IBM xlc aka vac - version 11.
afaik it will deal with c99 features (by default I set it to behave that
way because a common 'issue' is C++ style comments, when they should not
be that style (fyi: not seen that in Python).
IMHO: GCC is not just a compiler - it brings with it a
On 2016-03-18 05:57, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote:
Yeah, C99 (6.7.2.1) allows "a qualified or unqualified version of _Bool, signed int, unsigned
int, or some other implementation-defined type", and same for C11. This means that a compiler
could easily allow an implementation-defined
n test_shorts
self.assertEqual((name, i, getattr(b, name)), (name, i,
func(byref(b), name)))
AssertionError: Tuples differ: ('M', 1, -1) != ('M', 1, 1)
First differing element 2:
-1
1
- ('M', 1, -1)
? -
+ ('M', 1, 1)
On 17-Mar-16 23:31, Michael Felt wrote:
a) hope this is no
a) hope this is not something you expect to be on -list, if so - my
apologies!
Getting this message (here using c99 as compiler name, but same issue
with xlc as compiler name)
c99 -qarch=pwr4 -qbitfields=signed -DNDEBUG -O -I. -IInclude -I./Include
On 2016-03-02 18:45, Thomas Wouters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:50 AM, Michael Felt<aixto...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all,
1) There are many lists to choose from - if this is the wrong one for
questions about packaging - please forgive me, and point me in the right
direction.
It'
I guess I should have never changed the title - apparently the tracker
loses track - there are more than 5 messages.
On 2016-03-04 18:08, Python tracker wrote:
#26439: ctypes.util.find_library fails when ldconfig/glibc not availab
http://bugs.python.org/issue264395 msgs
And, while I do not
Can look at it. There has been a lot of discussion, iirc, between
OpenSSL and LibreSSL re: version identification.
Thx for the reference.
On 08-Mar-16 14:55, Hasan Diwan wrote:
On 8 March 2016 at 00:49, Michael Felt <mich...@felt.demon.nl
<mailto:mich...@felt.demon.nl&g
As a relative newcomer I may have missed a long previous discussion re:
linking with OpenSSL and/or LibreSSL.
In an ideal world this would be rtl linking, i.e., underlying
complexities of *SSL libraries are hidden from applications.
In short, when I saw this http://bugs.python.org/issue26465
Hello all,
1) There are many lists to choose from - if this is the wrong one for
questions about packaging - please forgive me, and point me in the right
direction.
2) Normally, I have just packaged python, and then moved on. However,
recently I have been asked to help with packaging an
41 matches
Mail list logo
