multiple 2.7.3 versions?

Discussion in 'Python' started by Robin Becker, Feb 15, 2013.

  1. Robin Becker

    Robin Becker Guest

    A colleague reports that this python from a recent Ubuntu x86_x64

    Python 2.7.3 (default, Sep 26 2012, 21:51:14)

    contains a fix of this bug

    http://bugs.python.org/issue15212

    however, all of my other Python 2.7.3s seem to lack this 'fix'.

    I would have thought that for a fix to appear in python we should at least get a
    micro version change, but the text here

    http://docs.python.org/2/faq/general.html#how-stable-is-python

    > The developers issue “bugfix” releases of older versions, so the stability of existing releases gradually improves. Bugfix releases, indicated by a third component of the version number (e.g. 2.5.3, 2.6.2), are managed for stability; only fixes for known problems are included in a bugfix release, and it’s guaranteed that interfaces will remain the same throughout a series of bugfix releases.


    would seem to indicate that changes to the spelling of a public variable would
    not change even with a change to the micro level so my colleague's machine
    should not produce this output


    >>>> from compiler import consts
    >>>> dir(consts)

    > ['CO_FUTURE_ABSIMPORT', 'CO_FUTURE_DIVISION', 'CO_FUTURE_PRINT_FUNCTION',
    > 'CO_FUTURE_WITH_STATEMENT', 'CO_GENERATOR', 'CO_GENERATOR_ALLOWED',
    > 'CO_NESTED', 'CO_NEWLOCALS', 'CO_OPTIMIZED', 'CO_VARARGS', 'CO_VARKEYWORDS',
    > 'OP_APPLY', 'OP_ASSIGN', 'OP_DELETE', 'SC_CELL', 'SC_FREE',
    > 'SC_GLOBAL_EXPLICIT', 'SC_GLOBAL_IMPLICIT', 'SC_LOCAL', 'SC_UNKNOWN',
    > '__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__package__']


    where the originally mis-spelled SC_GLOBAL_EXPLICT has changed to
    SC_GLOBAL_EXPLICIT.

    Can someone explain how this 'fix' is leaking out onto his machine? On all the
    other machines I have access to I'm seeing something similar to this
    > C:\tmp>python
    > Python 2.7.3 (default, Apr 10 2012, 23:31:26) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
    > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
    >>>> from compiler import consts
    >>>> dir(consts)

    > ['CO_FUTURE_ABSIMPORT', 'CO_FUTURE_DIVISION', 'CO_FUTURE_PRINT_FUNCTION', 'CO_FUTURE_WITH_STATEMENT', 'CO_GENERATOR', 'CO_GENERATOR_ALLOWED', 'CO_NESTED', 'CO_NEWLOCALS', 'CO_OPTIMIZED', 'CO_VARARGS', 'CO_VARKEYWORDS', 'OP_APPLY', 'OP_ASSIGN', 'OP_DELETE', 'SC_CELL', 'SC_FREE', 'SC_GLOBAL_EXPLICT', 'SC_GLOBAL_IMPLICIT', 'SC_LOCAL', 'SC_UNKNOWN', '__builtins__', '__doc__', '__file__', '__name__', '__package__']
    >>>>

    --
    Robin Becker
     
    Robin Becker, Feb 15, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robin Becker

    Roy Smith Guest

    In article <>,
    Robin Becker <> wrote:

    > A colleague reports that this python from a recent Ubuntu x86_x64
    >
    > Python 2.7.3 (default, Sep 26 2012, 21:51:14)
    >
    > contains a fix of this bug
    >
    > http://bugs.python.org/issue15212
    >
    > however, all of my other Python 2.7.3s seem to lack this 'fix'.
    >
    > I would have thought that for a fix to appear in python we should at least
    > get a
    > micro version change, but the text here
    >
    > http://docs.python.org/2/faq/general.html#how-stable-is-python


    I ran into a similar issue just recently (see this thread:
    http://tinyurl.com/ccvwj3e). The Ubuntu folks seem to be cherry-picking
    bugfixes and releasing them with the same version numbers.
     
    Roy Smith, Feb 15, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robin Becker wrote:

    > A colleague reports that this python from a recent Ubuntu x86_x64
    >
    > Python 2.7.3 (default, Sep 26 2012, 21:51:14)
    >
    > contains a fix of this bug
    >
    > http://bugs.python.org/issue15212
    >
    > however, all of my other Python 2.7.3s seem to lack this 'fix'.

    [...]
    > Can someone explain how this 'fix' is leaking out onto his machine?


    The major Linux distros, including Ubuntu, tend to release their own bug
    fixes independently to official Python releases.

    I guess that the fix your colleague is seeing is from Ubuntu.


    --
    Steven
     
    Steven D'Aprano, Feb 15, 2013
    #3
  4. Robin Becker

    Robin Becker Guest

    On 15/02/2013 14:00, Roy Smith wrote:
    ........
    >
    > I ran into a similar issue just recently (see this thread:
    > http://tinyurl.com/ccvwj3e). The Ubuntu folks seem to be cherry-picking
    > bugfixes and releasing them with the same version numbers.
    >

    yes it seems that must be the case. Maybe someone at python.org should tell the
    ubuntists not to do that.

    However, even a proper 2.7.4 release shouldn't change the interface (ie rename
    module variables). That must be down to someone at python.org. I guess because
    2.7 is the last minor release of the 2.x series that the stability requirements
    have been dumped.

    Luckily, our code didn't launch any missiles because of this 'fix'. I always
    recommend people to build their own python for exactly this reason.
    --
    Robin Becker
     
    Robin Becker, Feb 15, 2013
    #4
  5. Robin Becker

    Ned Deily Guest

    In article <>,
    Robin Becker <> wrote:

    > On 15/02/2013 14:00, Roy Smith wrote:
    > .......
    > >
    > > I ran into a similar issue just recently (see this thread:
    > > http://tinyurl.com/ccvwj3e). The Ubuntu folks seem to be cherry-picking
    > > bugfixes and releasing them with the same version numbers.
    > >

    > yes it seems that must be the case. Maybe someone at python.org should tell
    > the
    > ubuntists not to do that.
    >
    > However, even a proper 2.7.4 release shouldn't change the interface (ie
    > rename
    > module variables). That must be down to someone at python.org. I guess
    > because
    > 2.7 is the last minor release of the 2.x series that the stability
    > requirements
    > have been dumped.
    >
    > Luckily, our code didn't launch any missiles because of this 'fix'. I always
    > recommend people to build their own python for exactly this reason.


    If you think this change will cause significant user compatibility
    problems in the field, you should report it to the Python bug tracker
    right away. There may still time to deal with it before the next 2.7
    maintenance release, 2.7.4, which has been delayed somewhat.

    --
    Ned Deily,
     
    Ned Deily, Feb 15, 2013
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. JC
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    569
  2. David Gauerke
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    314
    David Gauerke
    Apr 15, 2004
  3. Andrew Shepherd

    Multiple versions of Oracle Client installed

    Andrew Shepherd, Jul 12, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,875
    Andrew Shepherd
    Jul 12, 2005
  4. =?Utf-8?B?UmljayBMdWJhbm92aWM=?=

    Running Multiple Versions of an ASP.NET app chooses wrong default

    =?Utf-8?B?UmljayBMdWJhbm92aWM=?=, Aug 9, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    309
    =?Utf-8?B?UmljayBMdWJhbm92aWM=?=
    Aug 9, 2005
  5. =?Utf-8?B?TWlrZSBLZWxseQ==?=

    Multiple customized versions of web.config

    =?Utf-8?B?TWlrZSBLZWxseQ==?=, Dec 30, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    586
    =?Utf-8?B?TWlrZSBLZWxseQ==?=
    Jan 3, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page