Skip to content

GH-91752: Skip test_freeze_simple_script when zlib is not available #91758

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 3, 2022
Merged

GH-91752: Skip test_freeze_simple_script when zlib is not available #91758

merged 3 commits into from
May 3, 2022

Conversation

AbhigyanBose
Copy link
Contributor

@AbhigyanBose AbhigyanBose commented Apr 20, 2022 •
edited by merwok
Loading

gh-91752: Skip test_freeze_simple_script when zlib is not available

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 20, 2022 •
edited by ghost
Loading

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.
CLA signed

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

Every change to Python requires a NEWS entry.

Please, add it using the blurb_it Web app or the blurb command-line tool.

@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot added tests Tests in the Lib/test dir awaiting review labels Apr 20, 2022
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

Every change to Python requires a NEWS entry.

Please, add it using the blurb_it Web app or the blurb command-line tool.

@tiran tiran changed the title Added @requires_zlib to test_freeze_simple_script.(GH-91752) GH-91752: Skip test_freeze_simple_script when zlib is not available Apr 22, 2022
tiran
tiran requested changes Apr 22, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@tiran tiran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please move the blurb from Library to Tests category.

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

And if you don't make the requested changes, you will be poked with soft cushions!

tiran
tiran reviewed Apr 22, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@tiran tiran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You don't have to import the function, just it from support module directly.

tiran
tiran approved these changes Apr 22, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@tiran tiran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks for the quick fix!

@AbhigyanBose
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tiran

Is there anything else I need to do here ?
Or should I just wait for someone to merge this ?

gvanrossum
gvanrossum approved these changes May 3, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@gvanrossum gvanrossum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like this simply fell between the cracks. Since @tiran approved it I am just going to merge it for you.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum merged commit 77e7a04 into python:main May 3, 2022
@merwok
Copy link
Member

merwok commented May 3, 2022

Are backports needed?

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

Let's try 3.10, 3.9.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum added needs backport to 3.9 only security fixes needs backport to 3.10 only security fixes labels May 3, 2022
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @AbhigyanBose for the PR, and @gvanrossum for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.9.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @AbhigyanBose for the PR, and @gvanrossum for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, @AbhigyanBose and @gvanrossum, I could not cleanly backport this to 3.9 due to a conflict.
Please backport using cherry_picker on command line.
cherry_picker 77e7a04cd235f1bcd6fc69bcb15e2683c365d637 3.9

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry @AbhigyanBose and @gvanrossum, I had trouble checking out the 3.10 backport branch.
Please backport using cherry_picker on command line.
cherry_picker 77e7a04cd235f1bcd6fc69bcb15e2683c365d637 3.10

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

I don't care enough about the backports, I'll remove the labels. @AbhigyanBose If you want to see if manually backporting makes sense, go ahead, but don't spend much time on it (the likely cause of the failure is that the code doesn't exist in that form in 3.10 or 3.9). Start with 3.10 first, if any.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum removed needs backport to 3.9 only security fixes needs backport to 3.10 only security fixes labels May 3, 2022
@AbhigyanBose
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm testing if backport's needed right now. But this issue seems to occur only for fresh installs of the OS (some dependency for a different application resolved the missing module issue on my daily os, currently testing with Docker containers)

@AbhigyanBose
Copy link
Contributor Author

Checked both 3.10 and 3.9, no backports required.

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

Cheers! Thanks for checking.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@tiran tiran tiran approved these changes

@gvanrossum gvanrossum gvanrossum approved these changes

Assignees

@gvanrossum gvanrossum

Labels
tests Tests in the Lib/test dir
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@AbhigyanBose @bedevere-bot @merwok @gvanrossum @miss-islington @tiran