This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Ping Re: Use gen-libm-test.py to generate ulps table for manual
On Mon, 17 Sep 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 12:41:45PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > > Dmitry, do you wish to make any comments on the use of Python in building
> > > glibc?
> >
> > My concern with making python a requirement to build glibc is that it will
> > pull in more packages not required to build glibc. If there is a "minimal"
> > subset of python that does not bring indirect dependencies to glibc build,
> > and at the same time is sufficient to build glibc, then adding this subset
> > of python as a requirement to build glibc shouldn't be a problem.
> >
> > I don't know yet whether SUSE or Debian take on the minimal subset pulls
> > in extra dependencies, I'll check this when time permits.
>
> Any conclusions there?
>
> I'm not sure it really matters for these purposes what a particular
> distribution's package pulls in, if they are happy with what works for
> them for the distribution build or bootstrap. The question for us would
> be more about what constraints this imposes on distributions in general
> (e.g. if it means libffi will be needed for a native build of glibc,
> depending on how far the indirect dependencies on ctypes in the Python
> standard library go), and whether we are OK with those constraints. The
> dependencies of the minimal distribution packages are simply useful
> information for us to help in determining those constraints.
Ping. Any conclusion on this question about indirect dependencies
introduced by use of Python?
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com