Overview
Loading...
Request History
a_faerber created request
Clean up Python packaging further (dependency of claripy and angr)
a_faerber added scarabeus_iv as a reviewer
Could you review the Python packaging please? (This is the minimal version while my Singlespec one is not working correctly yet.)
scarabeus_iv accepted review
Well as i wrote in the comments...
scarabeus_iv approved review
Well as i wrote in the comments...
pluskalm declined request
a_faerber reopened request
Declining without comment is not a solution!
pluskalm declined request
I will rather deal with this myself. P.S Silence is also not communication.
adrianSuSE revoked request
The source project 'home:a_faerber:branches:devel:languages:python' has been removed
I've checked the package and actually if you completely switch to python3 it will build on Leap42 so you can avoid all this conditioning and just keep py3 only, you just need to override python detection in cmake from Leap as it will always pick python2...
Or did I miss some reason why python2 would make sense there?
@dsterba, @jirislaby, @pluskalm: review reminder
@a_faerber you ask for review, and then packaging suggestions are not taken care of, questions are not replied - what was point of this whole exercise?
I do not feel as addressee of those questions unrelated to my changes, as I am merely trying to make this sub-package usable from other python3 packages, where the dependency is on z3-solver because pypi's z3 is some ZFS S3 storage module. I don't know why it was done like this in the first place, so without comments from any maintainer I am not making such changes - that could easily be done as follow-up.
I can point out that I have another separate branch that does build python2 packages even for Factory, simply because there are still packages around that do not easily build for Python3, namely angr.
Well first you ask question, you get answer - if it is not answer you wanted/expected silence sure is not appropriate way of communication.
I clearly disagree. I was waiting on the package maintainers to comment and there has still been no comments on the contents of the contents of my SR nor on Tomas' comment and no obvious criticism of the changes I proposed here from anyone. If you take care of the issues yourself, fine with me. If you want bug reports to track them, I can file them for you.
... and it fixes issues that slipped through review of @dimstar's SR, where I commented on the SR but did not get any reply either.