Re: ctypes-python bindings

On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 10:20 AM Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 18. 7. 2026 16:15, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> When testing 1.15.0-rc3, I stumbled on check-ctypes-python. That currently
> fails miserably:
>
> [[[
> python: can't open file '/home/dsg/ramdisk/svn_trunk2/none': [Errno 2] No
> such file or directory
> sed: can't read subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/svn_all.py: No such file
> or directory
> cd
> /home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/subversion/bindings/ctypes-python;
> \
>   /bin/bash "/home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/libtool" --tag=CC
> --silent --mode=execute `for f in
> /home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/subversion/*/*.la; do echo -dlopen
> $f; done` python test/run_all.py
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File
> "/home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/test/run_all.py",
> line 22, in <module>
>     import setup_path
>   File
> "/home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/test/setup_path.py",
> line 31, in <module>
>     import csvn.core
>   File
> "/home/dsg/ramdisk_backstorage/svn_trunk2/subversion/bindings/ctypes-python/csvn/core/__init__.py",
> line 20, in <module>
>     import functions
> ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'functions'
> make: *** [Makefile:1050: check-ctypes-python] Error 1
> ]]]
>
> I've started fixing errors one by one and I have a 444 line diff, but I'm
> no closer to making it work.
>
> Given that last substantial commit was somewhere around 2011, this is
> probably yet another feature we are not maintaining as well as we should. I
> believe a lot of things have not been updated from Py2 to Py3 standards but
> it seems to be other stuff as well.
>
>
>
> Ctypes-python is broken and unmaintained. Because of that, nobody uses it.
>
>
> Is there any advantage having a ctypes-binding over the swig-binding?
> Otherwise, I think we should axe this one as well - in this particular case
> (since it currently doesn't work) - I'm on the SIGKILL squad.
>
>
> Theoretically, one can build better bindings with ctypes than Swig,
> because you get a more "native" mapping of types. But we didn't. I think 15
> years of brokenness is long enough.
>
> -- Brane
>
>
I'm glad there's a good bit of housecleaning going on around here. We've
accumulated so much cruft over the years, it makes my head spin. +1 to axe
the ctypes bindings.

Cheers,
Nathan