From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE4BB1F5AE for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:58:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726742AbgGXN6u (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:58:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42182 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726329AbgGXN6t (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:58:49 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x442.google.com (mail-wr1-x442.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::442]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4ED8C0619D3 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x442.google.com with SMTP id f1so7861025wro.2 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:58:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=4HXGpzuohWroqKaIH9kR65g4+83S1QiModreBEukc1s=; b=F2G0tnU9RtNg+7CvxzUjT/WWP0B+7cYTLlAd0tuxXEsSsEdOS4w6H3voK6WINKFTZc 2e7sPfcpCkxo7pFN5dbqzJTsI47WSBT+/Zex2qOkeh2+D7fAJ+J9j3n2NGMJ/VifMlJ4 aYBYFyP67kD1384u9thH0R50EdFrrjZzt3n/r/gx+0I+fQ8e/M/mgcwHeaG+1IclhM6t AdZRSD1SkZG9mRWosAB2R8AUyQfPSTUeed3J3Kg7UAXkZg52wIBpo1uL1/QxF7xICcVt nnek71RnPc+4fYjq5eopqHs87SBnWD/2/hsvqsXvzcEc8ZOXrOt/hlxWHfnigNJA9Md3 SaEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4HXGpzuohWroqKaIH9kR65g4+83S1QiModreBEukc1s=; b=eIoEsaOObdo2t3NG73vvQ4/fGSp/6iDBGMQl3sDXtyoeSh4I33xZjYtQT0H4ee7gjp rCz0MaJEjns4T0F5rv4x+GX4vnEJBQOvK/UIJYqFzUD6XagGjl3fEz9wG8zQmhpFBfim 1z2HKGedZEYMNcursqS7+46RYWJlu7xrgP6SSIVG6xYQW1+QfUiyWLR9hqDSZdbVZvHe 0LfqErapDcW8VCEKJuOBiDJEuI0X1RwFjvv/J3MSgTNVIAkTSyfLWZSg6vRpOPE+Mf0R QAEqmflpneyI5XF/vVlzVqUMA4/zwkEDYcNVoswdL+ORNBW94Hwxa1uNrQUhpu15Gj7F hZ+g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532exxoPNu4zvnUgeSYKzKtoYG3gu8RTsdswJpOdXQFWtq+Ztmqs FbaXzpTTd6ZUa/zfa74zpcI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6IdXFJtttCdM0WXDR9zodPcLd9njEDiMIAqyOmnWXi0U2/ZEcq1/rIfc4NKUZnx3mj3bUBw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fd04:: with SMTP id e4mr8523210wrr.353.1595599128520; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szeder.dev (62-165-238-20.pool.digikabel.hu. [62.165.238.20]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 1sm7134869wmf.21.2020.07.24.06.58.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:58:45 +0200 From: SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "brian m. carlson" , Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ci: use absolute PYTHON_PATH in the Linux jobs Message-ID: <20200724135845.GN11341@szeder.dev> References: <20200723213848.30032-1-szeder.dev@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 03:31:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > SZEDER Gábor writes: > > Junio, I see that you picked up the first/RFC version and applied it > > on top of v2.26.2. This patch won't work on v2.26.2, because its 'git > > p4' is not compatible with python3 yet. > > Thanks. Which means that we do not need to touch maint track Yeah, that system Git is v2.21.x, as far as I remember, but apparently 'git p4' doesn't use any shiny new features since then, because all its test succeeded even with that old version. > (not > that we'd be merging the SHA-256 topic down to the maint track > anyway). It might be worth applying the final SHA-256 topic on top of this, though, so Travis CI builds of that branch on its own can succeed.