Bug#1029076: uwsgi-plugin-python3: built against non-default libpython3.11 / should always build against the defalt Python in testing
Package: uwsgi-plugin-python3
Version: 2.0.21-3+b1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-python@lists.debian.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Currently, the uWSGI Python 3 plugin is built against
Python 3.11, and depends on libpython3.11. This is,
to some extent, fine, as Python 3.11 is already in
Debian.
However, Python 3.10 is still the default Python in
bookworm, and as it stands this will not change [1].
In practice, this means that without changing the
interpreter and manually ensuring that the Python 3.11
environment is fully available, apps run through uWSGI
do not work.
So, the uWSGI plugin should in general always build
against the default Python IMHO.
- -nik
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2023/01/msg00010.html
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: bookworm/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 6.0.0-6-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=nb_NO.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=nb_NO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=nb_NO:nb:no_NO:no:nn_NO:nn:da:sv:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Versions of packages uwsgi-plugin-python3 depends on:
ii libc6 2.36-8
ii libpython3.11 3.11.1-2
ii uwsgi-core 2.0.21-3+b1
uwsgi-plugin-python3 recommends no packages.
Versions of packages uwsgi-plugin-python3 suggests:
pn python3-uwsgidecorators <none>
- -- no debconf information
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iMAEARYKAGgWIQSk6zxRYJYchegBkTEK5VTlRg4b3QUCY8aedTEaaHR0cHM6Ly93
d3cuZG9taW5pay1nZW9yZ2UuZGUvZ3BnLXBvbGljeS50eHQuYXNjGBxuYXR1cmVz
aGFkb3dAZGViaWFuLm9yZwAKCRAK5VTlRg4b3ZDoAQCYW8oE4ZgiBKkgo1lge2Az
7/qTIXGHgKAAF5kmuGTB5QD+NiuAOboj6I6ZvxRZF4o1D3vXCBr1HkqYz+piZMQO
Fgc=
=Y+XX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: