Skip to content
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.

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

Restores compatibility shim with platform.linux_distribution #325

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 13, 2022

Conversation

HorlogeSkynet
Copy link
Member

@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet commented Feb 12, 2022

#230 introduced proper support for os-release VERSION_CODENAME attribute but broke compatibility shim with (now defunct) platform.linux_distribution as the third tuple member (codename) were not taken from VERSION os-release attribute anymore.

Closes #238.


EDIT : Sorry for first submission, wrong revision.

@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet added this to the 1.7.0 milestone Feb 12, 2022
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet requested a review from a team February 12, 2022 12:52
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet self-assigned this Feb 12, 2022
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet force-pushed the fix/linux_distribution_id_regression branch from c39caf0 to 2871ef3 Compare February 12, 2022 13:35
src/distro/distro.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/distro/distro.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/test_distro.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@sethmlarson
Copy link
Contributor

Are we able to revert #230 first to ensure we're restoring compatibility and then evaluate what to do next?

@hartwork
Copy link
Contributor

Are we able to revert #230 first to ensure we're restoring compatibility and then evaluate what to do next?

@sethmlarson it's pretty big and in for 2 years. I'm not sure I'd vote for that path. What's the idea?

@HorlogeSkynet
Copy link
Member Author

Are we able to revert #230 first to ensure we're restoring compatibility and then evaluate what to do next?

I'm with @hartwork on this, #230 brings an important support and reverting it would change current distro behavior.

@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet force-pushed the fix/linux_distribution_id_regression branch from 2871ef3 to 68c163c Compare February 13, 2022 10:52
src/distro/distro.py Show resolved Hide resolved
src/distro/distro.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Samuel FORESTIER added 2 commits February 13, 2022 17:58
distro#230 introduced proper support for os-release `VERSION_CODENAME`
attribute but broke compatibility shim with (now defunct)
`platform.linux_distribution` as the third tuple member (codename) were
not taken from `VERSION` os-release attribute anymore.

Closes #238.
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet force-pushed the fix/linux_distribution_id_regression branch from 68c163c to fa43a62 Compare February 13, 2022 16:59
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet merged commit 91aa0df into master Feb 13, 2022
@HorlogeSkynet HorlogeSkynet deleted the fix/linux_distribution_id_regression branch February 13, 2022 17:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Distro 1.40: possible regression in distro.codename()
3 participants