"brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 2025-02-06 at 02:12:02, Kapil Somani wrote: >> Thanks for quick response Brian >> >> Yes, our team compiles git for use within our organization. >> I'll reach out to them and see if they can provide path during build. >> >> Meanwhile, I was able to update copy of the git (compiled by my team) to >> use python3 on shebang line. >> It appears that the git-p4 is compatible with Python3. Is git team planning >> to update it near future? > > It's my understanding that it's designed to work with both Python 2 and > 3. It's unlikely that the shebang will be updated until it's no longer Correct. The CI has jobs to try git-p4 with both python2 and python3 since Mar 2020. > guaranteed to work with Python 2, since `python` is more generic than > `python3`. When that is, I don't know, since I don't use Perforce and > don't maintain git-p4, which has a separate maintainer. I am not sure what story about shebang is discussed here. If the complaint is "your script says '/usr/bin/env python', but my users don't have 'python' on their $PATH", I think that is barking up a wrong tree. As a general principle, we try not to rely on "env". Just like other scripts, we munge git-p4.py script to replace the shebang line to use the path to the python binary specified by the builder into resulting git-p4 "executable" file that is installed. We do this (not specifically for git-p4 but as a general principle) because we do not want to get affected by random customized versions of stuff end-users install on their $PATH that overrides the ones from the system that builders determined to be used by Git. Is the complaint that "on my system there are /usr/bin/python2 and /usr/bin/python3 but no vanilla /usr/bin/python installed"? So it is your responsibility to tell the build procedure that you want to use "/usr/bin/python3", as the build procedure defaults to "/usr/bin/python" when you do not specify any.
