> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Dunlap <[email protected]>
> Sent: 21 July 2020 10:54
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>; Nick Rosbrook 
> <[email protected]>; xen-
> [email protected]; Nick Rosbrook <[email protected]>; Ian 
> Jackson
> <[email protected]>; Wei Liu <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.14] golang/xenlight: fix code generation for python 
> 2.6
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jul 21, 2020, at 10:23 AM, Paul Durrant <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>
> >> Sent: 21 July 2020 10:21
> >> To: [email protected]; 'Nick Rosbrook' <[email protected]>; 
> >> [email protected]
> >> Cc: 'Nick Rosbrook' <[email protected]>; 'Ian Jackson' 
> >> <[email protected]>; 'George
> >> Dunlap' <[email protected]>; 'Wei Liu' <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.14] golang/xenlight: fix code generation for 
> >> python 2.6
> >>
> >> On 21/07/2020 08:13, Paul Durrant wrote:
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Nick Rosbrook <[email protected]>
> >>>> Sent: 21 July 2020 00:55
> >>>> To: [email protected]
> >>>> Cc: [email protected]; Nick Rosbrook <[email protected]>; George Dunlap
> <[email protected]>;
> >>>> Ian Jackson <[email protected]>; Wei Liu <[email protected]>
> >>>> Subject: [PATCH for-4.14] golang/xenlight: fix code generation for 
> >>>> python 2.6
> >>>>
> >>>> Before python 2.7, str.format() calls required that the format fields
> >>>> were explicitly enumerated, e.g.:
> >>>>
> >>>>  '{0} {1}'.format(foo, bar)
> >>>>
> >>>>  vs.
> >>>>
> >>>>  '{} {}'.format(foo, bar)
> >>>>
> >>>> Currently, gengotypes.py uses the latter pattern everywhere, which means
> >>>> the Go bindings do not build on python 2.6. Use the 2.6 syntax for
> >>>> format() in order to support python 2.6 for now.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Nick Rosbrook <[email protected]>
> >>> I'm afraid this is too late for 4.14 now. We are in hard freeze, so only 
> >>> minor docs changes or
> >> critical bug fixes are being taken at
> >>> this point.
> >>
> >> This is Reported-by me, and breaking gitlab CI on the master and 4.14
> >> branches (because apparently noone else cares to look at the results...)
> >>
> >> The alternative is to pull support for CentOS 6 from the 4.14 release,
> >> which would best be done by a commit taking out the C6 containers from CI.
> >>
> >
> > At this late stage I'd rather we did that.
> 
> We should probably add a release note saying that there’s a known 
> intermittent build issue on CentOS
> 6.
> 

Ok, that sounds fine.

  Paul

>  -George


Reply via email to