linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/33] docs: kernel_abi.py: add a script to parse ABI documentation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 28 Oct 2020 18:02:47 +0100
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/33] docs: kernel_abi.py: add a script to parse ABI
 documentation

Em Wed, 28 Oct 2020 10:21:03 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:

> So this is separate from the patch series itself in a way, but it brings a
> question to mind:
> 
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:23:10 +0100
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > +# We can't assume that six is installed
> > +PY3 = sys.version_info[0] == 3
> > +PY2 = sys.version_info[0] == 2
> > +if PY3:
> > +    # pylint: disable=C0103, W0622
> > +    unicode     = str
> > +    basestring  = str  
> 
> I wonder how much longer we really need to support any of:
> 
>  - Python < 3.n (where n=5 or 6 maybe)
>  - Sphinx < 1.7 or even some 2.x
> 
> We're carrying a certain and growing amount of cruft to handle these
> cases.  I might start putting together a series to clean this up for 5.11
> or so.

Good point!

Yeah, 5.11 seems to be OK to drop support for legacy versions. In the case
of Sphinx, Imagining that 5.11 would be released in about 4/5 months
from now[1], I would move to 2.4.4 as the minimal recommended version.

Yet, due to LTS distros, maybe it could make sense to support 1.7 versions
for a longer time.

That's said, hopefully, Sphinx 3.3 would also be there about the same
time, which should fix the remaining warnings with Sphinx 3.x.

So, maybe for 5.11 or 5.12 we can drop the warning about Sphinx 3.x
builds being experimental.

Btw, we should probably also update this file:

	Documentation/process/changes.rst

It still mentions Sphinx 1.3 as the minimal one, and doesn't even
mention the minimal Python version.

[1] It was released in March, 2020. So, it will have one about year old
    by the time 5.11 will be launched.

Thanks,
Mauro