On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:48:43AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:38:10PM +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Shall we bump the release.py swig version to 3.x for 1.10.x? Currently it
> > points to 2.0.12 which is over 3 years old and AFAICT deprecated upstream
> > (there were no further releases of the 2.x line of swig).
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
> How far widespread is swig 3.0? It is not in OpenBSD ports yet, but perhaps
> those lack behind?
It's packaged in freebsd, opensuse, debian. Didn't check others.
> Could both versions be supported by us at the same time?
As others have said, configure already supports both 2.x and 3.x. The
remaining question is just whether release.py should use 2.x or 3.x for
rolling tarballs. release.py uses own swig version compiled directly
from swig upstream sources, so availability of swig3 in OS packages
isn't a blocker for upgrading release.py's swig version.
(And tarball users don't need swig at all)
Received on 2017-07-11 22:03:52 CEST