On 26.07.2017 11:08, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > On 21 July 2017 at 15:36, Michael Hudson-Doyle <[email protected] >> wrote: > >> On 29 June 2017 at 10:43, Michael Hudson-Doyle < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 21 June 2017 at 15:13, Michael Hudson-Doyle < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> An update on the transition to Python 3.6: Python 3.6 is now a supported >>>> version in artful release, and almost all packages that build C extensions >>>> have been rebuilt (pandas is still a problem). >>>> >>>> We have created a PPA where python3.6 is the default and rebuilt all >>>> python packages: https://launchpad.net/~canonical-foundations/+arch >>>> ive/ubuntu/python3.6-as-default/+packages and the next step is to fix >>>> all the failures this reveals. The initial failing source packages are >>>> listed in http://paste.ubuntu.com/24903638/ although some of those have >>>> been fixed now. >>>> >>> >>> The 100 or so failures are now summarised in >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Y8dy5cyu8DrmTvT4CNSa >>> VSP2ZZT79sYhT_rAQ19bFUQ/edit?usp=sharing, please do check if any >>> packages you care about are on the list and fix any that you can see how >>> to. Uploading fixes direct to the archive is preferred, but if you lack the >>> rights to do that, attaching a bug to a debdiff and subscribe me (mwhudson >>> on lp) and I'll sponsor it v. quickly! >>> >> >> We've fixed many of these now, and I've uploaded the change to make python >> 3.6 the default version in artful. Next step is getting this to migrate, >> see http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed- >> migration/artful/update_excuses.html#python3-defaults for that and please >> help fix anything that is preventing the migration (like whatever it is >> that breaks botch with python 3.6 as default...) >> > > We are so very close to this. > > The final barrier (assuming that the recently uploaded samba does not drag > any new problems in) is that src:yara does not build on armhf. This turns > out to be because the codebase is full of code that assumes unaligned > access is OK, for example stuff like this > https://github.com/VirusTotal/yara/blob/master/libyara/exec.c#L224 but also > more subtly stuff like > https://github.com/VirusTotal/yara/blob/master/libyara/scan.c#L409 > (new_match is only guaranteed to be 4-byte-aligned and crashes when you > access an 8 byte field). > > This could all be fixed, I'm sure, but I don't know if upstream would be > interested and at this stage I wonder if removing the package on armhf is > more pragmatic. It has a few rdeps but not all that many. Thoughts?
now reported upstream and in Debian, and uploaded to artful to ignore the test results on armhf; at least you won't see these on a 32bit kernel. -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
