Re: [PATCH] scripts/glibcelf.py: Mark as UNSUPPORTED on Python 3.5 and earlier

[Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>]

On 2022-04-26, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote:
>
>
>On 25/04/2022 18:06, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha:
>>
>>> On 25/04/2022 04:17, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote:
>>>> * Florian Weimer:
>>>>
>>>>> enum.IntFlag and enum.EnumMeta._missing_ support is not present in those
>>>>> Python versions.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  scripts/glibcelf.py | 6 ++++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/scripts/glibcelf.py b/scripts/glibcelf.py
>>>>> index 8f7d0ca184..da0d5380f3 100644
>>>>> --- a/scripts/glibcelf.py
>>>>> +++ b/scripts/glibcelf.py
>>>>> @@ -28,6 +28,12 @@ import collections
>>>>>  import enum
>>>>>  import struct
>>>>>
>>>>> +if not hasattr(enum, 'IntFlag'):
>>>>> +    import sys
>>>>> +    sys.stdout.write(
>>>>> +        'warning: glibcelf.py needs Python 3.6 for enum support\n')
>>>>> +    sys.exit(77)
>>>>> +
>>>>>  class _OpenIntEnum(enum.IntEnum):
>>>>>      """Integer enumeration that supports arbitrary int values."""
>>>>>      @classmethod
>>>>
>>>> I've pushed this, to avoid masking other failures in Joseph's tester.
>>>
>>> We still indicate that Python 3.4 is supported on INSTALL. I think we
>>> should either update it or add a fallback code on glibcelf.py.
>>
>> Tests using scripts/glibcelf.py are marked as UNSUPPORTED.  Isn't this
>> sufficient for now?
>>
>> We can say that Python 3.6 or later is recommended for full test
>> coverage.
>
>It would be good to have it proper documented yes, but would be possible
>to adapt the glibcelf.py to work with Python 3.4? So there will be no
>need to have to document that we support two different minor Python
>versions where if you use the older one you will have less test
>coverage (which I think it is not ideal).

Even Python 3.6 has reached end of life, so I think it is perhaps
reasonable to assume that at least 3.5 is needed for additional test
coverage but not the build...