Opened 4 years ago
Closed 4 years ago
#21900 closed defect (fixed)
Update backports_abc to version 0.5
Reported by:  slabbe  Owned by:  

Priority:  major  Milestone:  sage7.5 
Component:  packages: standard  Keywords:  
Cc:  Merged in:  
Authors:  Sébastien Labbé  Reviewers:  Jeroen Demeyer 
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  8b0e122 (Commits)  Commit:  8b0e1224c12b63cac75bf29cc8461b78c73b0534 
Dependencies:  Stopgaps: 
Description (last modified by )
I am trying to build vaucanson in sage and I get the following problem with Cython 0.25.1 merged in 7.5.beta1 (#20596). That problem does not appear with Cython 0.24. But the problem is really in backport_abc package not in Cython.
(sagesh) slabbe@MacBookebastien:build$ make python [ 20%] Linking CXX shared library libvaucrdyn.dylib [ 40%] Built target vaucrdyn Scanning dependencies of target python [ 60%] Forcing python library compilation [ 80%] Generating Python module Traceback (most recent call last): File "setup.py", line 41, in <module> ext_modules = cythonize(cython_module), File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Cython/Build/Dependencies .py", line 809, in cythonize aliases=aliases) File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/Cython/Build/Dependencies .py", line 648, in create_extension_list elif isinstance(patterns, basestring) or not isinstance(patterns, collections.Iterable): File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python/abc.py", line 144, in __instancecheck__ return cls.__subclasscheck__(subtype) File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python/abc.py", line 180, in __subclasscheck__ if issubclass(subclass, scls): File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python/abc.py", line 180, in __subclasscheck__ if issubclass(subclass, scls): File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python/abc.py", line 161, in __subclasscheck__ ok = cls.__subclasshook__(subclass) File "/Users/slabbe/Applications/sagegit/local/lib/python2.7/sitepackages/backports_abc.py", line 6 6, in __subclasshook__ mro = C.__mro__ AttributeError: class Extension has no attribute '__mro__' make[3]: *** [python/vaucrpy.so] Error 1 make[2]: *** [python/CMakeFiles/python.dir/all] Error 2 make[1]: *** [python/CMakeFiles/python.dir/rule] Error 2 make: *** [python] Error 2
This seems to have been fixed a few days ago: https://github.com/cython/backports_abc/commit/94294718c6293d1031228943590dc12fe772fa9b which have been released as version 0.5
Change History (19)
comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
comment:2 followup: ↓ 4 Changed 4 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage7.5 to sageduplicate/invalid/wontfix
 Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 2 ; followup: ↓ 5 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
How is this related to Sage?
I would like to make vaucanson as an optional Sage package.
Question: I am trying to find a workaround. I was thinking to add a patch on Cython0.25.1. But where is the file backports_abc.py ? It does not seem to be inside of Cython0.25.1 ?
comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 4 years ago by
Ok, now I see. The solution to this ticket to update Sage standard package backports_abc
from version 0.4 to 0.5.
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/backports_abc
Jeroen, if you agree, I will change the title of this ticket to "update backports_abc to 0.5" and I suggest to not close this ticket as "won't fix".
comment:6 Changed 4 years ago by
 Branch set to u/slabbe/21900
 Commit set to 7f32147741c4c20281ae67acd2eb73d2879e0b52
 Component changed from cython to packages: standard
 Description modified (diff)
 Milestone changed from sageduplicate/invalid/wontfix to sage7.6
 Summary changed from AttributeError: class Extension has no attribute '__mro__' to Update backports_abc to version 0.5
New commits:
7f32147  21900: Updating backports_abc pkg to v0.5

comment:7 Changed 4 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 4 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage7.6 to sage7.5
comment:9 followups: ↓ 13 ↓ 16 Changed 4 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_info
Why the .p0
in the version number?
comment:10 Changed 4 years ago by
Where is the new package?
comment:11 Changed 4 years ago by
 Commit changed from 7f32147741c4c20281ae67acd2eb73d2879e0b52 to e5d62ea7f08038b550c733027785f5b90c633667
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
e5d62ea  21900: package version 0.5.p0 > 0.5

comment:12 Changed 4 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
 Report Upstream changed from Fixed upstream, in a later stable release. to N/A
comment:13 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 4 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_info to needs_review
Replying to jdemeyer:
Why the
.p0
in the version number?
For the same reason as there was a .p0
in the version number for 0.4 without any patches to apply. So I removed the .p0
to be consistent with the fact that there is no patches to apply.
I also added a link to the tarball available on pypi in the first line of description of this ticket.
Needs review.
comment:14 Changed 4 years ago by
 Commit changed from e5d62ea7f08038b550c733027785f5b90c633667 to 8b0e1224c12b63cac75bf29cc8461b78c73b0534
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
8b0e122  21900: Update backports_abc to 0.5

comment:15 Changed 4 years ago by
I folded the two commits into one.
comment:16 in reply to: ↑ 9 ; followup: ↓ 17 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to jdemeyer:
Why the
.p0
in the version number?
Maybe you know the answer more than me:
$ git show 783cd7d build/pkgs/backports_abc commit 783cd7d541970012f037de0364df099312d2624a Author: Jeroen Demeyer <jdemeyer@cage.ugent.be> Date: Tue Sep 20 10:37:56 2016 +0200 Reinstall all pipinstalled packages diff git a/build/pkgs/backports_abc/packageversion.txt b/build/pkgs/backports_abc/packageversion.txt index bd73f47..fba722f 100644  a/build/pkgs/backports_abc/packageversion.txt +++ b/build/pkgs/backports_abc/packageversion.txt @@ 1 +1 @@ 0.4 +0.4.p0
So should it be with or without .p0
?
comment:17 in reply to: ↑ 16 Changed 4 years ago by
Ok, I found the ticket (https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21441#comment:21) which was related to the commit adding the .p0
to force reinstallation of some packages. So, I got my answer: that .p0
should be removed for 0.5
.
comment:18 Changed 4 years ago by
 Reviewers set to Jeroen Demeyer
 Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
I can't verify that it fixes your problem but otherwise this is fine...
comment:19 Changed 4 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/slabbe/21900 to 8b0e1224c12b63cac75bf29cc8461b78c73b0534
 Resolution set to fixed
 Status changed from positive_review to closed
How is this related to Sage?