On 04/09/2019 06:05, Greg Price wrote: My apologies for being so slow with a reply. I appreciate your comments!! Work - and a filter that put this in the wrong folder.
It sounds like you may be asking about two different things:
- adding more distinct platform tags for wheels to use for AIX,
indicating... a minimum OS level, if I'm connecting the dots correctly. This would be like what PEP 513 did with `manylinux1` for Linux, and PEP 571 is doing for the new-and-just-confusingly-named `manylinux2010`. I think you're suggesting that IBM's own "OS level" concept would make this a much less daunting task than the manylinux tags have been.
I think much less daunting, and more flexible. A touch of detail. Besides the "obvious" difference of AIX 5.3, 6.1, 7.1 and 7.2 there is an additional key value known as the build-date. As long as something is built on any AIX platform where all the "key values", of the build system are less-than or equal, then the model for AIX forward ABI compatibility are being met. That, and using shared libraries. Where this could break is when it is an OSS library (i.e. not IBM packaged and part of BOS (base OS) as libraries break separate of the OS.
- adding more information to `sysconfig.get_platform()` for AIX,
specifically the bittedness of the architecture.
For the second point, here's what I see on my Linux laptop:
That specifies the bittedness, so it seems natural to do the same on AIX. I expect the main question people will ask is about compatibility, with existing scripts out there that look at `sysconfig.get_platform()` and expect the current form of output for AIX.
For the first one, it sounds likely useful and definitely more work than the status quo, and I'd guess that simply no-one has stepped up to do that work. Perhaps you would like to do so. :-) In that case I think the first step will be to say more concretely what you imagine these tags looking like and meaning. And the best forum for that is very likely to be a packaging-specific forum rather than this list; there's distutils-sig, and you might also try https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging .
I'll look at the other forums you mention. I do have a PR waiting for comments:
Hope that helps move the discussion forward again. FYI - in preliminary testing - wheels can be built and uploaded (to a devpi server) and installed in virtual-env - without any additional patching of either pip or wheel (or devpi).
To have it work on values other than equality some changes will be needed - I expect only in pip - to know what to look for. And I have a concept for that (oslevel -s -q gives a list of all known build-levels). So it is not searching in a haystack. It will have to be one of something documented/known by/to the OS.
Again - thanks for your feedback and thoughts!
On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 1:53 PM Michael Felt email@example.com wrote:
Among other places, Python ideas was recommended as a place to goto.
In the meantime I have been discussing this on pypa/pip (mainly), and also on wheel and packaging. Even submitted PRs. But the PRs are only needed if the tag is inadequate.
So, part of my reason for being here is to figure out if I can call the current tag algorithm a bug, or is correcting it a feature?
I am trying to approach this the Python way rather than be seen as a bull in a china shop.
Thanks for replying!
Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://firstname.lastname@example.org/message/D2WTWE... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/