[lldb-dev] issue with lldb9 and python3.5
Kamil Rytarowski via lldb-dev
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Oct 29 14:08:35 PDT 2019
On 29.10.2019 21:40, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Oct 29, 6:54pm, pavel at labath.sk (Pavel Labath) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] issue with lldb9 and python3.5
> | On 29/10/2019 09:31, Serge Guelton via lldb-dev wrote:
> | > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:09:53AM -0700, Adrian McCarthy wrote:
> | >> +1 Yes, for Windows, I'd be happy if we said Python 3.6+.
> | >
> | > I investigated the bug yesterday, and filled some of my discoveries in
> | >
> | > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43830
> | >
> | > TLDR: libpython uses libreadline and lldb uses libedit, and that's a mess.
> | Hey Christos,
> | could I bother you to take a look at this python PR
> | <https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/16986>, and the related lldb bug
> | <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43830>?
> | The executive summary is that there is an incompatibility between
> | readline and its libedit emulation, which python needs to work around.
> | Is there any way this can be fixed in libedit?
> | I guess the presence of the workaround will make the fix tricky, because
> | then the workaround will be wrong for the "fixed" libedit, but it's
> | still probably worth it to try to resolve this somehow.
> | WDYT?
> I don't know what I have to do here. Can someone explain to me what the
> issue is?
Is this a packaging issue? There are good reasons to use libedit as a
gnu readline replacement. I am not sure how complete it is here, but
there is definitely better licensing (at least from the GPLv3 vs GPLv2
incompatibility point of view - certain projects must use one version,
others the other one). If there are some nits in the readline compat,
better to fix the editline code for general benefit.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the lldb-dev