Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #12627 > unrolled thread

Future of PyPy (not PyPy3) in Debian

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  Future of PyPy (not PyPy3) in Debian Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2020-06-05 02:10 +0200
    Re: Future of PyPy (not PyPy3) in Debian stefanor@debian.org - 2020-06-05 07:40 +0200

#12627 — Future of PyPy (not PyPy3) in Debian

Hello all,
it looks like i started a process that would require the removal of
several PyPy (as in pypy-* depending on the `pypy` package) packages
from the archive.

I'm now wondering: what should we do with the entire pypy ecosystem?
should we treat pypy-* packages like python-* ones and remove then as
part of py2removal? do we need/want to track this effort with the same
usertag? is there a (even if only hypothetical for now) programmed
transition from pypy- to pypy3-?

PS: if i made mistakes, just call me out, and i'll do my best to fix
them or revert them; i have no problem in being told i did something
wrong (let's keep the discussion in this thread on topic, so pypy etc)

Cheers,
--
Sandro "morph" Tosi
My website: http://sandrotosi.me/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
Twitter: https://twitter.com/sandrotosi

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12629

Hi Sandro (2020.06.05_00:00:30_+0000)
> I'm now wondering: what should we do with the entire pypy ecosystem?

Big picture:
Upstream is continuing to support pypy (2.7) for the foreseeable future.
I don't know what that will look like for stdlib support. But they need
a 2.7 interpreter for the rpython toolchain, so they're forced to
support it. They're starting to talk about porting rpython to python 3.
But that's probably a few years away, at least.

I need a 2.7 to build pypy3 (rpython). That could be cpython or pypy.
Currently both, pypy for the archs it has JIT support for, cpython for
the rest and bootstrapping new archs. My ideal would be to continue like
that.

As long as pypy is in the archive, I'd like it to be supported by
virtualenv, so that it's also useful to users.

> should we treat pypy-* packages like python-* ones and remove then as
> part of py2removal?

Generally speaking those pypy- libraries aren't needed. It looks like we
have only one app in the archive depending on them.

If upstreams drop Python 2.7 compatibility, these will have to go, anyway.

> do we need/want to track this effort with the same usertag?

You can probably get away with the same usertag. There are far fewer of
them.

> is there a (even if only hypothetical for now) programmed transition
> from pypy- to pypy3-?

pypy3 uses /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/ so there aren't pypy3-
packages (except for ones built by src:pypy3), just python3- packages.
That works well enough for pure Python, but there's no way to express
dependencies for C extensions, usefully. I guess we may end up with some
pypy3- packages for that (although that won't completely solve the
problem). Not a problem we've faced, yet.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web