From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38569) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gKPr1-0003LM-4H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 10:34:55 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gKPqz-0000It-2t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 10:34:51 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 13:34:22 -0200 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20181107153422.GY12503@habkost.net> References: <20181031003120.26771-1-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20181031003120.26771-12-ehabkost@redhat.com> <20181106141302.GP12503@habkost.net> <87efbxxw1c.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20181107124910.GX12503@habkost.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] [PATCH] tests: Fix Python 3 detection on older GNU make versions List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Markus Armbruster , Kevin Wolf , Fam Zheng , Qemu-block , Alex =?iso-8859-1?Q?Benn=E9e?= , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , QEMU Developers , Cleber Rosa , Max Reitz , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 01:45:35PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 7 November 2018 at 12:49, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > Now, why do we need --with-python, and why do we need to use > > $(PYTHON) when running tests? If somebody wants to use a > > different Python binary when running tests, they can already use > > $PATH for that. > > > > (That's the same argument I used for iotests a while ago: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg566631.html) > > I'm not a great fan of requiring the user to mess with their PATH > to get configure to work. Also, the first python on the path > might be the wrong one, and we don't pass PATH from configure > to make so you end up having to make sure you specify it > right in both places. You're assuming that this will actually require some people to mess with their $PATH because they currently don't have Python on their $PATH. I don't see any evidence that this is expected to happen. Do you? > > Plus we already have --with-python, so if you want to drop > it you need to deprecate it first, and you need a justification > that's strong enough to outweigh breaking users' existing > build/packaging setups and scripts... I would really like to remove the option as soon as we start requiring Python 3. Let's stop reinventing solutions to problems already addressed by PEP 394. -- Eduardo