Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] Remove python binding

>> -/python/libvirt.py >> -/python/libvirt_lxc.py >> -/python/libvirt_qemu.py > > Oddly enough, removing these lines will mean that someone with an > incremental tree that likes to switch branches between master and any > earlier branch (say v1.0.5-maint) will now see git complaining about > untracked files. I personally tend to avoid removing lines from > .gitignore (if we've ever ignored a file in the past, then branch > switching could leave the file around to still be ignored); but I won't > complain too much if you make the deletion (I can always re-add the > lines in my .git/info/exclude for my own environment). I'm happy either way. Personally when I see dead files appearing due to code re-orgs I usually just 'git clean' my working tree, but if we want to leave the python stuff in gitignore for a while we can do that too.

>> @@ -74,8 +73,6 @@ check-local: all tests >> >> tests: >> @(cd docs/examples ; $(MAKE) MAKEFLAGS+=--silent tests) >> - @(if [ "$(pythondir)" != "" ] ; then cd python ; \ >> - $(MAKE) MAKEFLAGS+=--silent tests ; fi) > > Did configure.ac clean up the setting of $(pythondir)? > /me looks some more > Wow - we never set $(pythondir) anywhere pre-patch, so it only ever did > something if you invoked 'make pythondir=...', and since autobuild > wasn't doing it, I think this was dead code. Yeah, in fact I think this entire 'tests' rule can probably just die. Testing should all be done via the standard 'make check' rule not a custom target.

>> dnl Allow perl overrides >> AC_PATH_PROG([PERL], [perl]) > > ...maybe all we need is a simple AC_PATH_PROG([PYTHON], [python]) for > the sake of still using $(PYTHON) during doc generation? And some of > this goes back to whether deleting --without-python from autobuild makes > sense. Yeah, that simply PATH_PROG would likely be sufficient.

>> @@ -425,7 +424,6 @@ BuildRequires: gettext-devel >> BuildRequires: libtool >> BuildRequires: /usr/bin/pod2man >> %endif >> -BuildRequires: python-devel > > Ouch. Don't we still need a buildreq on 'python' for doc generation > purposes, possibly conditionally based on whether we have patches > applied to a downstream rpm that warrant doc regeneration? 'python' is guaranteed in the default build roots for fedora/rhel I believe.

> I also just kicked off a 'make distcheck' and will report back later if > I saw anything fishy that needs fixing.

FYI I ran 'autobuild.sh' to validate the full RPM builds here.