[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Batuhan]

Batuhan  added the comment:

Tools/c-globals moved under Tools/c-analyzer

--
nosy: +BTaskaya

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Eric Snow]

Eric Snow  added the comment:

That email thread contains multiple references to scripts that may be used to 
identify ABI issues, among other good points.  FWIW, when consolidating the C 
globals last year I added a tool to track the remaining globals:

  Tools/c-globals

It is similar (at least in intent) to any solution we might pursue relative to 
the stable ABI.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Eric Snow]

Eric Snow  added the comment:

FTR, the issue of ABI breakage has come up quite a few times on the mailing 
list.  Most recently:

  https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-June/153775.html

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Serhiy Storchaka]

Change by Serhiy Storchaka :


--
nosy: +serhiy.storchaka

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Nick Coghlan]

Nick Coghlan  added the comment:

Updated link to the ABI tracker report: 
https://abi-laboratory.pro/tracker/timeline/python/

(The stable ABI report still has a separate entry on 
http://upstream.rosalinux.ru/ but it links to the same report as I've linked 
above)

I'm bumping this based on the 3.7.0 stable ABI break that Christian Tismer 
reported for PyIndex_Check - it's clear that we *need* some form of automated 
testing for the stable ABI, or we're going to continue to see issues like this 
crop up at release time.

(Folks freshly added to the nosy list: I added you either as release managers 
for 3.7+, or else because we've previously talked about the stable ABI and its 
maintainability)

--
nosy: +Christian.Tismer, benjamin.peterson, eric.snow, lukasz.langa, ned.deily, 
petr.viktorin, steve.dower, vstinner

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Nick Coghlan]

New submission from Nick Coghlan:

At Anatoly's prompting, Andrey Ponomarenko set up ABI/API compatibility checks 
for CPython on the Linux upstream tracker (http://upstream-tracker.org/)

Everything: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/python.html
Public API/ABI (no leading underscores): 
http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/python_public_api.html
3.2 limited API/stable ABI (no leading underscores): 
http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/python_stable_api.html

Andrey's analysis in the python-ideas thread [1] indicates we've likely made 
some mistakes in exposing struct internals, as well as exposing new APIs 
unintentionally under older Py_LIMITED_API definitions.

There's probably not too much (if anything) we can do to rectify the past 
mistakes, but we could set up a daily or weekly check (akin to the existing 
refleak scan) that monitored for such mistakes to prevent the introduction of 
any new errors along these lines.

[1] https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-April/133754.html

--
messages: 215432
nosy: ncoghlan
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Daily/weekly ABI scan?
type: enhancement

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21142
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue21142] Daily/weekly ABI scan?

[Andrey]

Andrey added the comment:

There are just three simple steps to setup ABI checker:

1. Create ABI dump of the _reference_ version (see instructions [1]) and commit 
it to the source tree (ABI-ref.dump):

$ abi-compliance-checker -l python -dump descriptor.xml -dump-path ABI-ref.dump

2. Create ABI dump of the _current_ version (ABI-cur.dump)
3. Compare these ABI dumps:

$ abi-compliance-checker -l python -old ABI-ref.dump -new ABI-cur.dump 
-report-path abi-report.html

To skip analysis of symbols with leading underscore pass this additional option 
to the tool when comparing ABI dumps: --skip-internal=\A_

For more information see [2].

[1] https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-April/133754.html
[2] http://ispras.linuxbase.org/index.php/ABI_compliance_checker

--
nosy: +aponomarenko

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21142
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com