On 07/30/2014 12:52 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:
On 30/07/14 00:07, Guy Streeter wrote:
>
> Personally, I really want to forget Python 2 and just write in Python 3 from
> now on. I'd like to propose some enhancements to the tuna GUI (more on that in
> another email), but I don't want to write them in Python 2, especially if they
> need to be changed for Python 3 in the future.
I agree. Moving towards Python 3 is the future. But I'm glad Python 2
will be supported for a while, so the transition can go smoother and not
be rushed.
I'm also the upstream maintainer of python-ethtool, and I do poke at it
from time to time. Moving towards Python 3 is a bigger job, but not
impossible. But I'm also evaluating if another approach of integration
should be considered, in addition to remove some old and deprecated APIs.
--
kind regards,
David Sommerseth
I checked the tuna code, and it uses get_active_devices() and get_module()
from python-ethtool. It wouldn't be hard to come up with that functionality in
an alternative way, so I don't think we have a really hard dependency there.
It occurred to me today that I have already written for another project a
Cython module that does everything we need python-schedutils to do. I could
break that out for tuna. It works just fine when compiled with Cython3.
python-linux-procfs is an odd collection of info parsed from /proc. I think
uplifting it to python3 is probably less work than finding alternative sources
for the information tuna gets from it.
I do have Cython modules that provide bindings for libnuma and libcgroup, in
case that's something tuna could use.
--Guy