On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 16:03:59 +1000 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Here's my proposed change: > > ================= > The default platform tag is distutils.util.get_platform() with all > hyphens - and periods . replaced with underscore _ . If > /etc/os-release [N] exists on the system, then the values in the 'ID' > and 'VERSION_ID' fields are read, all hyphens - and periods . replaced > with underscore _ , and the results appended to the default tag after > a separating underscore." > > Examples: > > * win32 > * macosx_10_6_intel > * linux_x86_64_fedora_20 > * linux_x86_64_rhel_7_0 > * linux_x86_64_debian_7_0 > * linux_x86_64_ubuntu_14_04
Is this not going to be a slippery slope? > Now, this slightly overspecifies on the *consumer* side. A binary > wheel that works on "rhel_7_0" for example, should almost certainly > work on "rhel_7_1". However, that can be addressed on the tooling side > (e.g. permitting the specification of "additional compatible > platforms" when invoking pip), rather than needing to be in the > specification. How about those lesser known distributions (e.g. Linux Mint or Mageia)? How many binary packages will package authors have to provide to cover people's needs? Windows + OS X + Linux multiplied by 32 / 64 multiplied by three or four Python versions is already a lot of binaries to build... While this would be a good technical solution, I think it's socially disastrous. Of course, you may point out that it has its roots in the failure of the GNU/Linux ecosystem to provide real binary compatibility. It's stunning that under Windows you can build a Windows XP-compatible shared library with a recent MSVC just by turning a switch in the options... Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig