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 0554AA04F3; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:10:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D625B1DA06; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:10:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9A41DA04 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 16:10:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1578496210; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=wdDWS9bblGTpO+ix2asp7xCgT+370ArW2HHyznpvR8c=; b=htb4jjiLTth1HQnXSKcjg15ARxnTDUYgZ0G3yULKP5zfOfrRHD8dCN9e9gRlHI82G+B1+7 oWh+5WCDw4VllEJInl1kwPmuZhPdJdJ8x0yLQYTXcNVFtocf+YcHbZRUG3O5IBttY3aZP9 Ce7V6HG9yCzdn6ZmqdCGWbsnRu0C90M= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-342-wEP4MujQPGCjzC4LLRTaGg-1; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 10:10:09 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04265800D4E; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com (unknown [10.18.25.108]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 177E86EE39; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:10:00 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: David Marchand Cc: Bruce Richardson , Luca Boccassi , dev , Michael Santana , Thomas Monjalon References: <20200108110251.20916-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <8a5bc72da0875617a690d6a95d310974413f46da.camel@debian.org> <20200108121011.GA235@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 10:10:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: (David Marchand's message of "Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:22:41 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-MC-Unique: wEP4MujQPGCjzC4LLRTaGg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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" 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 t= hat >> > > > 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 newe= r >> 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?