Re: [PATCH] docs: document python version used for compilation
From: Thierry Reding
Date: Thu May 30 2024 - 13:08:12 EST
On Fri May 10, 2024 at 10:04 PM CEST, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 3:09 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 10 May 2024, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Em Fri, 10 May 2024 11:08:38 +0300
> > > Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, 09 May 2024, Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > The drm/msm driver had adopted using Python3 script to generate register
> > >> > header files instead of shipping pre-generated header files. Document
> > >> > the minimal Python version supported by the script.
> > >> >
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> > ---
> > >> > Documentation/process/changes.rst | 1 +
> > >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >> >
> > >> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/changes.rst b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> > >> > index 5685d7bfe4d0..8d225a9f65a2 100644
> > >> > --- a/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> > >> > +++ b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> > >> > @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ cpio any cpio --version
> > >> > GNU tar 1.28 tar --version
> > >> > gtags (optional) 6.6.5 gtags --version
> > >> > mkimage (optional) 2017.01 mkimage --version
> > >> > +Python (optional) 3.5.x python3 --version
> > >>
> > >> Python 3.5 reached end-of-life 3½ years ago [1]. What's the point in
> > >> using anything older than the oldest supported version of Python,
> > >> i.e. 3.8 at this time?
> > >
> > > What's the point of breaking compilation with on older distros?
> > > The idea of minimal versions here is to specify the absolute minimum
> > > version that it is required for the build to happen. If 3.5 is
> > > the minimal one, then be it.
> >
> > AFAICT 3.5 was an arbitrary rather than a deliberate choice. We should
> > at least be aware *why* we'd be sticking to old versions.
> >
> > Minimum versions here also means sticking to features available in said
> > versions, for Python just as well as for GCC or any other tool. That's
> > not zero cost.
>
> At this point, the cost to having a lower minimum version is pretty
> small, so I'm not worrying too much about it.
>
> Maybe once kernel developers discover mako, and start generating more
> at build time, we'll have to re-evaluate. ;-)
You're making an interesting point. Does the build dependency here
denote Python (& standard library) or do we assume that if people have
Python installed that they can also install arbitrary extra packages?
Would a Mako dependency need to be explicitly mentioned here?
Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature