Description of problem:
syck-python in fc5 does not present the 'dump' function, needed for YAML
serialization. See http://pyyaml.org/ticket/2
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. install syck
2. pydoc syck
Syck doesn't have a dump function
Syck would have a dump function, as referenced by most syck-python examples (see
You might look at
WORKSFORME, there's a syck-0.61-1.src.rpm there as well.
No I'm not interested in adopting ...
To clarify "WORKSFORME" doesn't refer to the original package.
Unless there's an open bugzilla for the inclusion of PySyck above, I am
currently trying to get an alternative to the broken package approved.
I'd really be happier with either version in extras, though I chose to put my
foot behind the YAML 1.1 compliant version, regardless of what I think of YAML
not needing a 1.1 ... PySyck is apparently a dead end according to pyyaml.org.
PySyck works today, and works well.
FWIW, the lack of dump in syck-python could probably be repaired quickly if anyone really cared.
But you appear to want the Latest and Greatest Next Generation Whizbanger if you are claiming "dead
end". It's not like YAML is widely used, bits and patches litter about ...
BTW, there's also lsyck.c within syck, I know of no other replacement for that.
Also FYI, syck-0.61 (and lsyck) is integrated into rpm-4.4.7. PySyck if the need arises.
"But you appear to want the Latest and Greatest Next Generation Whizbanger if
you are claiming "dead end"
Perhaps there was a communication error.
If this is about PyYaml vs SyckPython, it seems like here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190493 is a better place to
talk about that. I am not talking about orphaning syck and the C bindings that
RPM uses at all, I am only reporting that "syck-python" is broken.
"FWIW, the lack of dump in syck-python could probably be repaired quickly if
anyone really cared."
PySyck is a result of someone caring about this. Since you've packaged it, why
not submit it for Extras? Extras needs a replacement yaml parser, and I would
not loose sleep over having to use PySyck vs PyYaml.
POI: there are 3 implementations of yaml for python:
syck-python appears broken, but there are other reasons, such as ruby/lua YAML,
to continue syck even if syck-python is borked.
PySyck is an alternative, more featureful, python bindings for syck.
PyYAML is probably the most complete YAML implementation for python.
And rpm depends on none of the above, has an internal copy of lsyck.c and
I prefer being a non-Fedora contributor.
"syck-python appears broken, but there are other reasons, such as ruby/lua YAML,
to continue syck even if syck-python is borked."
Regarding the other 'zilla, given that pretty much all Perl/Ruby/Lua/Etc
implementations are doing YAML 1.0 (nothing wrong with that), PySyck is probably
a better answer *now* than PyYAML. I'm going to kill the other 'zilla, and if
someone wants to fix this, my recommendation is replacing the syck-python RPM
Kick out -python from syck now!?
Can you have a look at the latest syck pkg in rawhide?
I don't have a rawhide setup ATM. If the function is available in rawhide I'd
say we can close it -- though it would be nice to see the fix also pushed to F7.
(FWIW, I ended up embedding an older yaml serializer in my app for backwards
Currently, the pydoc doesn't say anything about the dump function, but looking
at the pkg content there is a ydump, that defines the dump function. I close it