Re: Fedora Non-responsive maintainer check for fab

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Hi,

Il giorno gio 29 mag 2025 alle ore 06:20 Federico Pellegrin <fede@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:

I'm a bit surprised about what you mention for F41 as with F40 I had multiple problems due to Python incompatibilities, so while I did not try (jumped 40->42) I'd imagine the same ones would be in 41. But as you say, it is also totally true that the major version brought breaking changes as well, absolutely! (but between a broken package and a broken API I'd imagine we could go for the latter ;-) )


Just a short self-follow-up on F41 I've tried just now and ie.:

Python 3.13.3 (main, Apr 22 2025, 00:00:00) [GCC 14.2.1 20250110 (Red Hat 14.2.1-7)] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import pysnmp
>>> import pysnmp.hlapi
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<python-input-1>", line 1, in <module>
    import pysnmp.hlapi
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/hlapi/__init__.py", line 10, in <module>
    from pysnmp.hlapi import auth
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/hlapi/auth.py", line 7, in <module>
    from pysnmp.entity import config
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/entity/config.py", line 8, in <module>
    from pysnmp.carrier.asyncore.dgram import udp, udp6, unix
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/carrier/asyncore/dgram/udp.py", line 9, in <module>
    from pysnmp.carrier.asyncore.dgram.base import DgramSocketTransport
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/carrier/asyncore/dgram/base.py", line 10, in <module>
    from pysnmp.carrier.asyncore.base import AbstractSocketTransport
  File "/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pysnmp/carrier/asyncore/base.py", line 9, in <module>
    import asyncore
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'asyncore'
>>>

Which points directly to https://peps.python.org/pep-0594/ which removes asyncore from 3.12 (which is Fedora>=40). This is just the most obvious, but also carrier is broken in a similar way (ie. if you check carrier/asyncore/base.py).

So IMHO it would be worth, despite yes it means also breaking changes, to merge also to F41. Then not sure if, bringing as well breaking changes, this requires a special procedure then.

Cheers,
Federico
-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux