GNU bug report logs -
#51314
[PATCH 00/29] Add Octoprint (web UI for 3d printers).
Previous Next
Full log
Message #332 received at 51314 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Vinicius Monego schreef op ma 30-05-2022 om 20:55 [+0000]:
> As mentioned in the cover letter for v4, octoprint hard-checks the
> versions of its dependencies and uses pip to download new versions for
> the packages it judges the version is incorrect. In the case of
> zeroconf there is a notice in setup.py:
>
> https://github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/blob/53b9b6185781c07e8c4744a6e28462e96448f249/setup.py#L67
To me this seems information to put in a comment next to the input list
(and next to python-zeroconf-0.33). Also, I recommend removing the pip
downloading code to be 100% sure it won't be run.
> The author recognizes that octoprint is not so friendly to packagers:
> https://github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/issues/1922#issuecomment-302407764
> It does depend on specific versions of some packages, for the one >
or other reasons, and this is something I do not want not change
> > - I've run into too many problems with outdated python libraries
> > provided by the system package manager that produced horribly
> > hard to track down bugs.
There are bugs in the python-zeroconf <at> 0.33 that have been fixed in
python-zeroconf <at> 0.38.1. The readme in
https://github.com/jstasiak/python-zeroconf mentions a few fixed bugs
that seem rather subtle.
So as-is, we would be distributing an octoprint with a known-buggy
depdendency with known fixes. Though neither is changing to the new
zeroconf an option (unless changes are made to octoprint) as-is because
the new zeroconf is apparently incompatible.
Greetings,
Maxime.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 170 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.