From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CB49A04F3; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:50:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A7A1D997; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:50:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B5BB1D666 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:50:31 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2020 07:50:30 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,410,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="211576512" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.26]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Jan 2020 07:50:28 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:50:25 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Aaron Conole Cc: David Marchand , Luca Boccassi , dev , Michael Santana , Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20200108155025.GA239@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20200108110251.20916-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <8a5bc72da0875617a690d6a95d310974413f46da.camel@debian.org> <20200108121011.GA235@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ci: pin meson to 0.52.0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 10:10:00AM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote: > David Marchand writes: > > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 1:10 PM Bruce Richardson > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 12:59:35PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > >> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 12:29 PM Luca Boccassi wrote: > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, 2020-01-08 at 12:02 +0100, David Marchand wrote: > >> > > > meson 0.53.0 has a compatibility issue [1] with the python 3.5.2 that > >> > > > comes > >> > > > in Ubuntu 16.04. > >> > > > Let's pin meson to 0.52.0 while the fix is being prepared in meson. > >> > > > > >> > > > 1: > >> > > > https://github.com/mesonbuild/meson/issues/6427 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand < > >> > > > david.marchand@redhat.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > --- > >> > > > .ci/linux-setup.sh | 2 +- > >> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > > > >> > > Acked-by: Luca Boccassi > >> > > >> > There is a 0.52.1 version available, so I suppose we can blacklist > >> > meson < 0.53 instead. > >> > Thought? > >> > > >> > If noone objects, I will apply a fix by the end of the day. > >> > > >> Wondering if there is value in using 0.47.1, the minimum version we > >> support, to catch potential issues with someone using features from newer > >> versions? I suspect there are more people using the latest releases of > >> meson than the baseline supported version? > > > > Testing with a fixed version seems better in a CI, and since we > > announce this minimum version, then yes, it makes sense. > > I will post a v2. > > Why is 0.47.1 still the minimum? Don't we require features that are > introduced as of 0.50? > No, it should still work fine, and a quick sanity check tested with 0.47.1 on my system shows no issues, so I think we are good. There are some warnings printed about future features when you use a later version, but in all cases the extra parameters added are just ignored by the older versions, so compatiblity is maintained. Adding 0.47.1 to the CI will also help avoid any inadvertent new version requirements from sneaking in. /Bruce