Should Cygwin Python use --enable-runtime-pseudo-reloc?

The attached will obviate need for patches like the following forever: http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=676837&group_id=5470&atid=305470 http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=676839&group_id=5470&atid=305470 Unfortunately, this is a slippery slope. Unlike auto-importing functions which has been around for a while, auto-importing data is very new (and kind of scary). Additionally, it requires a special linker option, --enable-runtime-pseudo-reloc, to work in all cases. Hence, Cygwin Python shared extensions and embedded interpreters will need to modify their build process unless they are using distutils. I'm looking for advice. Should I use the latest, greatest Cygwin functionality that makes building as similar as possible to Unix? Most likely at the expense of breaking some dependent packages. Or, are patches like the above considered acceptable and the preferred way to go? Thanks, Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6

[Jason Tishler]
The attached will obviate need for patches like the following forever:
http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=676837&group_id=5470&atid=305470
http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=676839&group_id=5470&atid=305470
I'll note at the start that these two specific patches are just changing PyObject_HEAD_INIT(&PyType_Type) to PyObject_HEAD_INIT(NULL) in PyTypeObject definitions. That's a common thing throughout the code base, although Cygwin seems to need it where no other systems do.
Unfortunately, this is a slippery slope. Unlike auto-importing functions which has been around for a while, auto-importing data is very new (and kind of scary). Additionally, it requires a special linker option, --enable-runtime-pseudo-reloc, to work in all cases. Hence, Cygwin Python shared extensions and embedded interpreters will need to modify their build process unless they are using distutils.
I'm looking for advice. Should I use the latest, greatest Cygwin functionality that makes building as similar as possible to Unix? Most likely at the expense of breaking some dependent packages. Or, are patches like the above considered acceptable and the preferred way to go?
Those specific patches are acceptable <wink>. Whether they're desirable has partly to do with how you weigh the tradeoffs, and partly with that you'll have to continue making such patches for so long as Cygwin has this unique behavior (you can try to explain when it's needed, but it's not going to sink in for people on other platforms).

Tim, On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 02:44:48PM -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
Those specific patches are acceptable <wink>.
I will stick with the tried and true for 2.3.
Whether they're desirable has partly to do with how you weigh the tradeoffs, and partly with that you'll have to continue making such patches for so long as Cygwin has this unique behavior ...
Maybe I will get bold in 2.4... Thanks, Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
participants (2)
-
Jason Tishler
-
Tim Peters