Opened 11 years ago

Closed 11 years ago

Last modified 11 years ago

#7912 closed enhancement (duplicate)

upgrade Python to 2.6.4

Reported by: jhpalmieri Owned by: tbd
Priority: major Milestone: sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
Component: packages: standard Keywords:
Cc: Merged in:
Authors: John Palmieri Reviewers: Craig Citro
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: Commit:
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by jhpalmieri)

I'm posting an spkg to update Python from 2.6.2 to 2.6.4. The changes from the previous spkg: in spkg-install, I have removed the lines

# This tells Bash to exit the script if any statement returns a non-true
# value.
set -e

Reason: in this part of the script, we want to test the return values and print a helpful message if they're not true, rather than just exit silently.

I've also removed the patch for the file src/Lib/ctypes/__init__.py, because I think it only deals with Mac OS X, 10.3 or earlier, and we don't support that. Does Sage even build on pre-10.4 systems?

I looked at the other patches, and I think we still need them, but I'm not an expert. (I tried removing the pickle patches, for instance, and got lots of doctest failures.)

I've added a patch file for socket.py: what we're patching hasn't changed, but in the previous spkg, there wasn't a patch file recording it.

The spkg is here: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/python-2.6.4.p0.spkg.

Actually, I'm not sure I see the point of another patch, the one to pkgutil.py. The SPKG.txt file says

 * Patch pkgutil.patch: Make Python's help command work in Sage, work
   around failures for locals.

I built an spkg without this patch, and it seems to work fine, but I may very well be missing something. That version is here: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/palmieri/SPKG/python-2.6.4.p1.spkg.

With both of these spkg's, I see one new doctest failure, but I don't know if it's significant. If it's not significant, it's easy enough to fix the doctest. It's for sage/misc/explain_pickle.py -- see the last line ("(cPickle raised an exception!)"):

File "/Applications/sage_builds/sage-4.3.1.alpha1-new-python/devel/sage/sage/misc/explain_pickle.py", line 2279:
    sage: test_pickle(pickle.dumps(v))
Expected:
        0: (    MARK
        1: (        MARK
        2: l            LIST       (MARK at 1)
        3: p        PUT        0
        6: (        MARK
        7: g            GET        0
       10: t            TUPLE      (MARK at 6)
       11: p        PUT        1
       14: a        APPEND
       15: 0        POP
       16: 0        POP        (MARK at 0)
       17: g    GET        1
       20: .    STOP
    highest protocol among opcodes = 0
    explain_pickle in_current_sage=True/False:
    si1 = []
    si2 = (si1,)
    list.append(si1, si2)
    si2
    result: ([(...)],) (cPickle raised an exception!)
Got:
        0: (    MARK
        1: (        MARK
        2: l            LIST       (MARK at 1)
        3: p        PUT        0
        6: (        MARK
        7: g            GET        0
       10: t            TUPLE      (MARK at 6)
       11: p        PUT        1
       14: a        APPEND
       15: 0        POP
       16: 0        POP        (MARK at 0)
       17: g    GET        1
       20: .    STOP
    highest protocol among opcodes = 0
    explain_pickle in_current_sage=True/False:
    si1 = []
    si2 = (si1,)
    list.append(si1, si2)
    si2
    result: ([(...)],)

Change History (5)

comment:1 Changed 11 years ago by jhpalmieri

  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 11 years ago by jhpalmieri

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed 11 years ago by craigcitro

  • Reviewers set to Craig Citro
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

I'm listing this as positive review -- I used this spkg as the base when I made a newer one for #7095. There were one or two tiny issues (removing the wininst-*.exe files, for instance), but I fixed those up. I think we should close this ticket, since this is now going to get merged as part of #7095. (John, if you agree, go ahead and close it.)

comment:4 Changed 11 years ago by jhpalmieri

  • Resolution set to duplicate
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed

I'm closing this as "duplicate", since Craig has a revised version of the spkg at #7095, and we should use that one instead.

comment:5 Changed 11 years ago by mvngu

  • Milestone set to sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.