Opened 10 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#13319 closed defect (fixed)
Python 2.7.3.px spkg does not build on Cygwin.
Reported by: | jpflori | Owned by: | tbd |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-5.6 |
Component: | porting: Cygwin | Keywords: | pythong cygwin spkg |
Cc: | kcrisman, dimpase | Merged in: | sage-5.6.beta0 |
Authors: | Jean-Pierre Flori | Reviewers: | Dmitrii Pasechnik |
Report Upstream: | Fixed upstream, but not in a stable release. | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | #13579 | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
Some patches posterior to Python 2.7.3 are needed to build on Cygwin. Namely fixes from the issues 9665, 14437, 14438 on Python issue tracker.
Use the spkg available at: http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/jpflori/python-2.7.3.p3.spkg
Attachments (3)
Change History (33)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
- Cc kcrisman dimpase added
- Description modified (diff)
- Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
this patch (apparently) allowed Python spkg to build on my Cygwin installation (on 32-bit Win 7). Good!
The next spkg, mercurial, failed with a typical fork() trouble. But this is probably not related. I guess now I need to rebaseall, including newly created dlls...
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
Same for me about mercurial. I'm posting my progress on the CygwinPort page on a freshly installed Cygwin 1.7.16 on Windows 7 64 bits for Sage 5.2.
comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by
- Keywords spkg added
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Could you please use my autotools spkg to regenerate configure
and friends with the same version as the original?
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
Also, for timestamp reasons, the file configure
must be patched after configure.in
. This means that, either you create a separate patch for configure.in
and for configure
, or you manually reverse the order of the patches in the .patch
file.
comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by
I've updated the spkg after using your autotools package and manually reversed the order of configure and configure.in in the parch file. The spkg diff will follow shortly.
comment:8 follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
One can remark that, although a quite similar version of autoconf was used, there are still of useless changes to the configure script... but much less than before.
comment:9 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
looks OK to me.
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 8 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jpflori:
One can remark that, although a quite similar version of autoconf was used, there are still of useless changes to the configure script... but much less than before.
Indeed. This is likely because the previous configure
script was created by a distribution-patched autoconf
with the same version number, but some patches added.
comment:11 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:12 Changed 10 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-5.4 to sage-5.5
comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:14 Changed 10 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Dmitrii Pasechnik
comment:15 Changed 10 years ago by
This will eventually need to be rebased to #13579, but I would wait until that ticket gets settled.
comment:16 follow-up: ↓ 17 Changed 10 years ago by
Couldn't we go the other way around? I understand that #13579 is infinitly more crucial than the problem dealt with here, but the solution here won't move by an inch for sure.
comment:17 in reply to: ↑ 16 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to jpflori:
Couldn't we go the other way around?
Not really. I don't think blocker tickets should depend on non-blockers.
Rebasing this spkg won't be a huge deal, I'll do it myself if needed.
comment:18 Changed 10 years ago by
No problem, I understand your point.
comment:19 Changed 10 years ago by
- Dependencies set to #13579
- Milestone changed from sage-5.5 to sage-pending
comment:20 Changed 9 years ago by
In order to test Sage 5.5.rc0 on Cygwin, I created a (probably sketchy) spkg here based on #13631, the followup to #13579. JP or Jeroen can feel free to make it better, but I really wanted to try things on 5.5.rc0 since we have this little lull in merging now which gives me a breather to test this out.
comment:21 follow-up: ↓ 22 Changed 9 years ago by
Could you post the diff from last commit? It will be easier to have a look at that first.
comment:22 in reply to: ↑ 21 Changed 9 years ago by
Could you post the diff from last commit? It will be easier to have a look at that first.
Good point, coming right up.
comment:23 follow-up: ↓ 27 Changed 9 years ago by
Well, Python builds with this, anyway. I do get offset on the sdist.py file in hunks 1 and 2, and a huge number of warnings while untarring of
tar: Ignoring unknown extended header keyword `SCHILY.{dev,nlink,ino}`
and I have no idea what that was about. As usual, the bits to build several modules were not found, but they look like the usual ones.
I also got a somewhat more worrisome
IOError: invalid Python installation: unable to open /home/newsagetest/sage-5.5.rc0/local/lib/python-2.7/config/Makefile (No such file or directory)
but eventually everything seemed to work and
math module imported OK
etc., so maybe we're in business... ?
comment:24 Changed 9 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Summary changed from Python 2.7.3.p0 does not build on Cygwin. to Python 2.7.3.px spkg does not build on Cygwin.
Ok, I've slightly reworked your spkg to properly rebase it on the sage shipped spkg (I guess you took the spkg from the ticket page which does not contain the hg tag). I've simplified a patch which modified useless parts of configure. I've updated the patches so that there is no fuzz. There does not seem to be tar problems anymore (I got these with your original spkg).
If you wanna have a look and check it builds correctly it shoudl stay positive review I guess.
I've checked it builds ok on Linux and will try Cygwin tonight. As downloading sage 5.5.rc0 from boxen is too low and I've deleted the tar, I'll try to begin from a built dir from my linux install, not sure it will work.
comment:25 follow-up: ↓ 26 Changed 9 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-pending to sage-5.6
I've built the spkg successfully with sage-5.5.rc0 on my windows 7 (64 bits) as well. Python says some modules were not build, but the same is true under linux (in fact there is no inclusion between the two lists, some modules were built on Cygwin (_curses, _curses_panel, imageop, dbm, dl) and not on Linux and vice-versa (nis, spwd, linuxaudiodex, ossaudiodev))/
So let's leave this as positive review, nothing really changed since Dima review, and merge this asap to avoid further rebasing.
comment:26 in reply to: ↑ 25 Changed 9 years ago by
Python says some modules were not build, but the same is true under linux (in fact there is no inclusion between the two lists, some modules were built on Cygwin (_curses, _curses_panel, imageop, dbm, dl) and not on Linux and vice-versa (nis, spwd, linuxaudiodex, ossaudiodev))/
Hilarious - it's yet another combo on XP and another on Mac.
So let's leave this as positive review, nothing really changed since Dima review, and merge this asap to avoid further rebasing.
Agreed.
comment:27 in reply to: ↑ 23 Changed 9 years ago by
Replying to kcrisman:
Well, Python builds with this, anyway. I do get offset on the sdist.py file in hunks 1 and 2, and a huge number of warnings while untarring of
tar: Ignoring unknown extended header keyword `SCHILY.{dev,nlink,ino}`
That's because of a slightly different tar format (GNU tar vs. BSD tar). But that's no problem because my merger script always untars and tars the spkgs to ensure a consistent format.
comment:28 Changed 9 years ago by
- Status changed from positive_review to needs_work
- Work issues set to HTTP 404
The requested URL /home/flori/python-2.7.3.p3.spkg was not found on this server.
comment:29 Changed 9 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Status changed from needs_work to positive_review
- Work issues HTTP 404 deleted
The URL was just a little off.
comment:30 Changed 9 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-5.6.beta0
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
Some further details:
The patche we need from 9665 modifies configure.in (the other patch is just issue 14337). In order to take it into account in the configure script, I ran "autoreconf -i" which also modified the configure script in several other places, but in a seemingly harmless way. It is mainly because I used a newer version of autotools than the one originally used for the Python 2.7.3 release, and autotools decided inbetween to prefix some variables names with "ac_". A somehow less invasive solution would be to directly patch the configure script, but I'm less inclined to do so than properly patching configure.in.
The updated spkg is available at: http://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/~flori/sage/python-2.7.3.p1.spkg
It builds correctly on Ubuntu 12.04 64 bits and is currently building on my Cygwin 1.7.16 on Windows 7 64 bits (it failed a first time but because of memory exhaustion which I often get while using Cygwin or MinGW).
I've search trac for a more recent spkg than the 2.7.3.p0 but did not find anything. If I missed some tickets including such an spkg, please let me know or directly rebase the patches proposed here.