Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

gh-127072: Remove outdatedsocket.NETLINK_* constants.#127256

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Merged
gpshead merged 2 commits intopython:mainfromrruuaanng:remove-netlink-const
Nov 27, 2024

Conversation

@rruuaanng
Copy link
Contributor

@rruuaanngrruuaanng commentedNov 25, 2024
edited
Loading

They have been removed from the linux master branch, but I'm not sure we need to sync with master (this would be a problem for older systems that would not be able to use the removed constants when built from cpython master source).

Copy link
Member

@ZeroIntensityZeroIntensity left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Do we still support Linux systems that can have these constants? If we do, then we need a deprecation period. Otherwise this is fine.

@rruuaanng
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Personally, I believe that the main branch should support the latest features. If users need to use them, they can opt for previous releases rather than building from the main branch source code. Moreover, the feature support for operating systems should not be deprecated, as they may be removed at any time due to performance issues. WDYT?

gpshead and erlend-aasland reacted with thumbs down emoji

@rruuaanng
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

I should summon another OS enthusiast, listen to his opinion.

cc@zooba

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

I'm not too sure what your point is. We're not supporting anything new--we're just removing support for some macros, which have very little maintenace burden anyway. I'm not opposed to removing them if they aren't available on any system that Python can be built for, because then we're just getting rid of code clutter, but I want to be absolutely sure before we do.

If users need to use them, they can opt for previous releases rather than building from the main branch source code.

Rant aside, that's not encouraging. Ideally, we want people to migrate to new versions, not brush people off with "download <3.14 instead if you need to use that."

Moreover, the feature support for operating systems should not be deprecated, as they may be removed at any time due to performance issues.

Sure, but we're awrapper over OS features--we'd be deprecating our wrapper for a feature, not the feature itself.

@rruuaanng
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

rruuaanng commentedNov 26, 2024
edited
Loading

I'm not too sure what your point is. We're not supporting anything new--we're just removing support for some macros, which have very little maintenace burden anyway. I'm not opposed to removing them if they aren't available on any system that Python can be built for, because then we're just getting rid of code clutter, but I want to be absolutely sure before we do.

I'm almost sure that it doesn't exist in the main branches of Linux and freeBSD.

So my current idea is to wait for zooba answer. I'm not sure whether there is a compatible system similar to netlink in windows.

Edit

So my point is that if there is a compatible system in Windows, then I will turn off this PR. If it does not exist, then this PR can be merged, because we don't need to maintain some macro packages that do not exist.

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

I'm almost sure that it doesn't exist in the main branches of Linux and freeBSD.

Great, but we support more than just their current main. I get that these macros aren't onmodern systems, but what about the older versions that we support? Will we give a nasty surprise to them with 3.14?

I'll yield to Steve, but I doubt he'll be in favor of dropping support for things without checking to make sure that nobody is using them.

@rruuaanng
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

I get that these macros aren't on modern systems, but what about the older versions that we support? Will we give a nasty surprise to them with 3.14?

Yes, that's what I'm worried about, so the PR is a draft. I'm not sure if there is a cpython that migrates the old-system to the main branch.

@tungol
Copy link
Contributor

tungol commentedNov 26, 2024
edited
Loading

I searched through Linux kernel sources for these. The most recent version of Linux that included any of these constants was 2.6.17, which was EOL in October 2006. I don't know how much of an afterlife Linux kernel versions have after EOL though.

gpshead, ZeroIntensity, and erlend-aasland reacted with thumbs up emoji

Copy link
Member

@gpsheadgpshead left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

I searched through Linux kernel sources for these. The most recent version of Linux that included any of these constants was 2.6.17, which was EOL in October 2006. I don't know how much of an afterlife Linux kernel versions have after EOL though.

This is the way to approach this kind of change. Thanks.

It is fine for us to drop support for an 18 year old kernel. (anything that is still within thekernel SLTS/CIP window is worth continuing to support)

I confirmed your greps by spot checking 2.6.18 and a 4.20.17 kernel source. These constants are long gone.

In general though, this kind of change has little value. So rather than spend time doing this kind of sleuthing we just let the no-op ifdef'd things sit around. It is highly annoying if we ever get this wrong as people have to adapt by manually defining the constant in their code, at which point they trust us less.

ZeroIntensity and erlend-aasland reacted with thumbs up emoji
@gpsheadgpshead marked this pull request as ready for reviewNovember 27, 2024 06:35
@gpsheadgpsheadenabled auto-merge (squash)November 27, 2024 06:36
@gpsheadgpshead merged commit6d3b520 intopython:mainNov 27, 2024
46 checks passed
@rruuaanngrruuaanng deleted the remove-netlink-const branchNovember 27, 2024 12:08
@rruuaanng
Copy link
ContributorAuthor

Thanks for the merge of@gpshead. Here, I know a new OS enthusiast :)

ebonnal pushed a commit to ebonnal/cpython that referenced this pull requestJan 12, 2025
…nGH-127256)Remove seriously outdated netlink constants.Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <greg@krypto.org>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ZeroIntensityZeroIntensityZeroIntensity left review comments

@gpsheadgpsheadgpshead approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@rruuaanng@ZeroIntensity@tungol@gpshead

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp