From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 66692 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2019 15:28:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 66105 invoked by uid 89); 19 Feb 2019 15:28:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*x:2.5, H*UA:2.5, bye X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (HELO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) (148.163.156.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:21 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1JFJhsC119952 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 10:28:20 -0500 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qrj6prf4u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 10:28:19 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:16 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:14 -0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x1JFSD2V8847412 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:13 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C05EA4057; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 799EEA4053; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from oc3748833570.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.62.102]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: by oc3748833570.ibm.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EED6CD8029F; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 16:28:12 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Define gdb.Value(bufobj, type) constructor To: tom@tromey.com (Tom Tromey) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:28:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: kevinb@redhat.com (Kevin Buettner), gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tom@tromey.com (Tom Tromey) In-Reply-To: <87wolvu7pk.fsf@tromey.com> from "Tom Tromey" at Feb 19, 2019 08:19:19 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 x-cbid: 19021915-0012-0000-0000-000002F7996C X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19021915-0013-0000-0000-0000212F26D3 Message-Id: <20190219152812.EED6CD8029F@oc3748833570.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2019-02/txt/msg00304.txt.bz2 Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Kevin" =3D=3D Kevin Buettner writes: > > >> However, this seems like a decision to make consciously. > >> I'm not completely sure how to proceed, though one idea might be to find > >> the most recent Python 2.[456] compatibility patch and then asking the > >> author whether this support is still relevant. > > Kevin> I didn't know of that compatibility patch, though I'll try to track = > it > Kevin> down. (A pointer would be appreciated if you have one handy.) > > I just recall it happening from time to time. Using: > > git log --grep 'Python 2\.[4-6]' So I've been running an SPU build bot on RHEL 5, which still has Python 2.4 as system version. Those patches were from when I noticed build breaks because of that. However, a while back I switched my build bot to use a private Python 2.7 instead of the system Python 2.4, so I guess at this point I'm not even noticing any 2.4 related issues. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be fine with removing compatibility with older Python versions ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com