Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Ronald Oussoren]

> On 30 Jan 2018, at 18:42, Chris Barker  wrote:
> 
> Ned,
> 
> It looks like you're still building OS-X the same way as in the past:
> 
> Intel 32+64 bit, 10.6 compatibility
> 
> Is that right?
> 
> Might it be time for an update?
> 
> Do we still need to support 32 bit?  From:
> 
> https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/99640/how-old-are-macs-that-cannot-run-64-bit-applications
>  
> 
> 
> There has not been a 32 bit-only Mac sold since 2006, and a out-of the box 32 
> bit OS since 2006 or 2007
> 
> I can't find out what the older OS version Apple supports, but I know my IT 
> dept has been making me upgrade, so I"m going to guess 10.8 or newer…

A binary with a newer deployment target than 10.6 would be nice because AFAIK 
the installers are still build on a system running that old version of OSX. 
This results in binaries that cannot access newer system APIs like openat (and 
hence don’t support the “dir_fd” parameter in a number of function in the os 
module.

> 
> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds……

Why?  IMHO Framework builds are a nice way to get isolated side-by-side 
installations. Furthermore a number of Apple APIs (including the GUI libraries) 
don’t work unless you’re running from an application bundle, which the 
framework builds arranges for and normal unix builds don’t. 

Ronald

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Chris Barker]

>> Ned Deily is in charge of the Mac build (as well as current release
> manager).  Within the last week, he revised the official builds (now two, I
> believe) for 3.7.0b1, due in a day or so.  One will be a future oriented
> 64-bit build.  The PR and What's New have more.
>

What's New doesn't mention it, but Ned's annoucemtn does:

"""
Attention macOS users: with 3.7.0b1, we are providing a choice of
two binary installers.  The new variant provides a 64-bit-only
version for macOS 10.9 and later systems; this variant also now
includes its own built-in version of Tcl/Tk 8.6.  We welcome your
feedback.
"""

So that's a start -- thanks Ned!

He may not be reading this thread, but will read MacOS tracker issues with
> a specific proposal, data and a patch.  Comparisons should be against the
> current master or an installed 3.7.0b1.


I hope the folks on this thread that know what they are doing can test and
make suggestions :-)

-CHB



-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:18 AM, Chris Barker  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Joni Orponen 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
>> chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..

>>>
>>> Please do not. These make life easier for doing things the Apple way for
>>> signed sandboxed applications.
>>>
>>> For the record, are you re-distributing the python.org builds, or
>>> re-building yourself?
>>>
>>
>> We are re-building ourselves.
>>
>
> Then it makes no difference to you if the pyton.org binaries are
> Framework builds... though maybe you want the configure target available.
>

And if the official distribution distributes a Framework, the configure
target and build for that are also actually maintained, which will keep
them likelier usable.

Would we not be doing a couple of very specific things, we'd be able to use
the distributed Framework as well. It is not unconceivable we could use it
as-is in the future or for other projects.

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Terry Reedy]

On 1/31/2018 6:23 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:20 AM, INADA Naoki > wrote:


> Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
> 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
> 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
> 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
> 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
> 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
> 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
> 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
>
> Pretty good numbers overall I think.

Yay!!  Congrats for all of us!


I'm confused -- I _think_ these are performance improvements of the 
Anaconda build over the python.org  build for OS-X -- 
so congrats to the Anaconda team :-)


But a hint that maybe we should do the python.org  
builds differently!


Ned Deily is in charge of the Mac build (as well as current release 
manager).  Within the last week, he revised the official builds (now 
two, I believe) for 3.7.0b1, due in a day or so.  One will be a future 
oriented 64-bit build.  The PR and What's New have more.


He may not be reading this thread, but will read MacOS tracker issues 
with a specific proposal, data and a patch.  Comparisons should be 
against the current master or an installed 3.7.0b1.


--
Terry Jan Reedy


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Chris Barker]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:20 AM, INADA Naoki  wrote:

> > Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
> > 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
> > 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
> > 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
> > 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
> > 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
> > 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
> > 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
> >
> > Pretty good numbers overall I think.
>


> Yay!!  Congrats for all of us!
>

I'm confused -- I _think_ these are performance improvements of the
Anaconda build over the python.org build for OS-X -- so congrats to the
Anaconda team :-)

But a hint that maybe we should do the python.org builds differently!

-CHB


-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Chris Barker]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Joni Orponen 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
> chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
>
>> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..
>>>
>>
>> Please do not. These make life easier for doing things the Apple way for
>> signed sandboxed applications.
>>
>> For the record, are you re-distributing the python.org builds, or
>> re-building yourself?
>>
>
> We are re-building ourselves.
>

Then it makes no difference to you if the pyton.org binaries are Framework
builds... though maybe you want the configure target available.

-CHB

-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Steve Holden]

Doh! Thank you.

Steve Holden
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Victor Stinner]

Click on "[x] horizontal" to exchange the two axis ;-)

Victor

2018-01-31 16:08 GMT+01:00 Steve Holden :
> The horizontal axis labelling in that graph is useless with so many tests
> included!
>
> Would a graphic with hover labels over the bars be more useful?
>
> Steve Holden
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Victor Stinner 
> wrote:
>>
>> There is https://speed.python.org/comparison/ to compare Python 2.7, 3.5,
>> 3.6 and master (future 3.7).
>>
>> Victor
>>
>> Le 31 janv. 2018 13:14, "Ray Donnelly"  a écrit :
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Joni Orponen 
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ray Donnelly 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance benefit over official releases
>>> >> as
>>> >> measured using 'python performance'.
>>> >>
>>> >> Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only
>>> >> build
>>> >> for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
>>> >> python 3.6 can be found at:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Do you metrify LTO and PGO independent of each other as well or only
>>> > the
>>> > "enable everything" combo? I've had mixed results with LTO so far, but
>>> > this
>>> > is probably hardware / compiler combination specific.
>>>
>>> I've never found enough time to take detailed metrics, sorry. Maybe
>>> one day? Looking at my performance graphs again:
>>>
>>> Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
>>> 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
>>> 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
>>> 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
>>> 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
>>> 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
>>> 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
>>> 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
>>>
>>> Pretty good numbers overall I think.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Joni Orponen
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > Python-Dev mailing list
>>> > Python-Dev@python.org
>>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>>> > Unsubscribe:
>>> >
>>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mingw.android%40gmail.com
>>> >
>>> ___
>>> Python-Dev mailing list
>>> Python-Dev@python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.stinner%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/steve%40holdenweb.com
>>
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Steve Holden]

The horizontal axis labelling in that graph is useless with so many tests
included!

Would a graphic with hover labels over the bars be more useful?

Steve Holden

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Victor Stinner 
wrote:

> There is https://speed.python.org/comparison/ to compare Python 2.7, 3.5,
> 3.6 and master (future 3.7).
>
> Victor
>
> Le 31 janv. 2018 13:14, "Ray Donnelly"  a écrit :
>
>> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Joni Orponen 
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ray Donnelly 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance benefit over official releases as
>> >> measured using 'python performance'.
>> >>
>> >> Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only
>> build
>> >> for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
>> >> python 3.6 can be found at:
>> >
>> >
>> > Do you metrify LTO and PGO independent of each other as well or only the
>> > "enable everything" combo? I've had mixed results with LTO so far, but
>> this
>> > is probably hardware / compiler combination specific.
>>
>> I've never found enough time to take detailed metrics, sorry. Maybe
>> one day? Looking at my performance graphs again:
>>
>> Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
>> 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
>> 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
>> 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
>> 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
>> 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
>> 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
>> 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
>>
>> Pretty good numbers overall I think.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Joni Orponen
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Python-Dev mailing list
>> > Python-Dev@python.org
>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> > Unsubscribe:
>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mingw.
>> android%40gmail.com
>> >
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.
>> stinner%40gmail.com
>>
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> steve%40holdenweb.com
>
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Victor Stinner]

There is https://speed.python.org/comparison/ to compare Python 2.7, 3.5,
3.6 and master (future 3.7).

Victor

Le 31 janv. 2018 13:14, "Ray Donnelly"  a écrit :

> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Joni Orponen 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ray Donnelly 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance benefit over official releases as
> >> measured using 'python performance'.
> >>
> >> Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only
> build
> >> for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
> >> python 3.6 can be found at:
> >
> >
> > Do you metrify LTO and PGO independent of each other as well or only the
> > "enable everything" combo? I've had mixed results with LTO so far, but
> this
> > is probably hardware / compiler combination specific.
>
> I've never found enough time to take detailed metrics, sorry. Maybe
> one day? Looking at my performance graphs again:
>
> Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
> 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
> 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
> 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
> 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
> 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
> 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
> 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
>
> Pretty good numbers overall I think.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > --
> > Joni Orponen
> >
> > ___
> > Python-Dev mailing list
> > Python-Dev@python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> > Unsubscribe:
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> mingw.android%40gmail.com
> >
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
> victor.stinner%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[INADA Naoki]

>
> Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
> 1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
> 5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
> 13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
> 21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
> 14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
> 5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
> 0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.
>
> Pretty good numbers overall I think.
>
>

Yay!!  Congrats for all of us!

-- 
INADA Naoki  
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Ray Donnelly]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Joni Orponen  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ray Donnelly 
> wrote:
>>
>> We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance benefit over official releases as
>> measured using 'python performance'.
>>
>> Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only build
>> for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
>> python 3.6 can be found at:
>
>
> Do you metrify LTO and PGO independent of each other as well or only the
> "enable everything" combo? I've had mixed results with LTO so far, but this
> is probably hardware / compiler combination specific.

I've never found enough time to take detailed metrics, sorry. Maybe
one day? Looking at my performance graphs again:

Against the official CPython 3.6 (probably .3 or .4) release I see:
1 that is 2.01x faster (python-startup, 24.6ms down to 12.2ms)
5 that are >=1.5x,<1.6x faster.
13 that are >=1.4x,<1.5x faster.
21 that are >=1.3x,<1.4x faster.
14 that are >=1.2x,<1.3x faster.
5 that are >=1.1x,<1.2x faster.
0 that are < 1.1x faster/slower.

Pretty good numbers overall I think.




>
> --
> Joni Orponen
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mingw.android%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ray Donnelly 
wrote:

> We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance benefit over official releases as
> measured using 'python performance'.
>
> Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only build
> for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
> python 3.6 can be found at:
>

Do you metrify LTO and PGO independent of each other as well or only the
"enable everything" combo? I've had mixed results with LTO so far, but this
is probably hardware / compiler combination specific.

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:

> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..
>>
>
> Please do not. These make life easier for doing things the Apple way for
> signed sandboxed applications.
>
> Thanks — good to hear there is a good reason for them. I’ve always thought
> that Frameworks were designed with other use-casss, and didn’t really help
> with Python.
>
> For the record, are you re-distributing the python.org builds, or
> re-building yourself?
>

We are re-building ourselves. Seems we've cooked up something not too
unsimilar to what Anaconda is doing, but less generic and covering less
corner cases.

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Ray Donnelly]

On Jan 31, 2018 8:31 AM, "Ray Donnelly"  wrote:



On Jan 30, 2018 6:47 PM, "Joni Orponen"  wrote:

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Ray Donnelly 
wrote:

> While we're making such macOS-build requests, any chance of building a
> static interpreter too? We've been doing that on the Anaconda
> Distribution since the 5.0 release in September and it seems to be
> working well.
>

PyPy is also currently eyeing doing their macOS builds better:
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/issues/2734/establis
h-a-build-and-release-pipeline-for

What do the Anaconda static builds get built on?


We have our own clang pseudo cross-compilers and use a macOS 10.9 SDK for
all of our package compilation to achieve compatibility (this means we can
compile on newer macOS just fine). We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance
benefit over official releases as measured using 'python performance'.

Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only build
for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
python 3.6 can be found at:


s/continues/contributes/


https://github.com/AnacondaRecipes/python-feedstock/tree/master/recipe


-- 
Joni Orponen

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mingw.
android%40gmail.com
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Ray Donnelly]

On Jan 30, 2018 6:47 PM, "Joni Orponen"  wrote:

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Ray Donnelly 
wrote:

> While we're making such macOS-build requests, any chance of building a
> static interpreter too? We've been doing that on the Anaconda
> Distribution since the 5.0 release in September and it seems to be
> working well.
>

PyPy is also currently eyeing doing their macOS builds better:
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/issues/2734/establish-a-build-and-release-
pipeline-for

What do the Anaconda static builds get built on?


We have our own clang pseudo cross-compilers and use a macOS 10.9 SDK for
all of our package compilation to achieve compatibility (this means we can
compile on newer macOS just fine). We see a 1.1 to 1.2 times performance
benefit over official releases as measured using 'python performance'.

Apart from a static interpreter we also enable LTO and PGO and only build
for 64-bit so I'm not sure how much each bit continues. Our recipe for
python 3.6 can be found at:

https://github.com/AnacondaRecipes/python-feedstock/tree/master/recipe


-- 
Joni Orponen

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/
mingw.android%40gmail.com
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Chris Barker - NOAA Federal]

> It would be nice to do more things the Apple way, including porting to modern 
> runtime feature availability check cascades of the Cocoa APIs and using the 
> Apple provided system Frameworks. This seems like a rather major workload and 
> should be targeting 3.8.

Yeah — too much to do for 3.7 at this stage.

But what about dropping 32 bit and maybe bumping the OS up? Maybe
10.11 is too new, but something newer than 10.6?

Or maybe 10.11 is a good target — looks like it’s been around 2+
years, and Apple now provides free updates.

-CHB
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Chris Barker - NOAA Federal]

And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..
>

Please do not. These make life easier for doing things the Apple way for
signed sandboxed applications.


Thanks — good to hear there is a good reason for them. I’ve always thought
that Frameworks were designed with other use-casss, and didn’t really help
with Python.

For the record, are you re-distributing the python.org builds, or
re-building yourself?

-CHB



Joining the discussion here from a ~cross-post on pythonmac-sig:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/pythonmac-sig/2018-January/024283.html

-- 
Joni Orponen

___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/chris.barker%40noaa.gov
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Ray Donnelly 
wrote:

> While we're making such macOS-build requests, any chance of building a
> static interpreter too? We've been doing that on the Anaconda
> Distribution since the 5.0 release in September and it seems to be
> working well.
>

PyPy is also currently eyeing doing their macOS builds better:
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/issues/2734/establish-a-build-and-release-pipeline-for

What do the Anaconda static builds get built on?

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Matt Billenstein  wrote:

> OSX is in a sad state linking to system libs on the later releases -- maybe
> 10.11 and on, not sure of the exact release -- they stopped shipping the
> headers for things like ssl and ffi since they don't want 3rd parties
> linking
> to deprecated versions of those libraries versus, in the case of ssl, their
> newer security framework.  Recommendation is to bundle what you need if
> you're
> not using the framework -- something to think about.


There are also some practical issues with trying to distribute software
using some deprecated Cocoa APIs or weak linked syscalls. The pythonmac-sig
thead I linked to earlier has pointers to how to flare those up if one ever
needs to distribute Python to a specific macOS version target range while
compiling on a newer macOS.

It would be nice to do more things the Apple way, including porting to
modern runtime feature availability check cascades of the Cocoa APIs and
using the Apple provided system Frameworks. This seems like a rather major
workload and should be targeting 3.8. I'm willing to participate in that
effort.

The availability of syscalls across targets when cross-compiling for an
older target is a more generic build system problem and I'm not sure if
Python should do anything other than just document it being a thing. I'm
personally fine patching pyconfig.h after running the configure script for
this special case.

As suggested on pythonmac-sig, I'd like to see 10.11 get chosen as the
macOS to build on as it provides a decent balance between hardware
compatibility and being new(er).

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Joni Orponen]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Chris Barker  wrote:
>
> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..
>

Please do not. These make life easier for doing things the Apple way for
signed sandboxed applications.

Joining the discussion here from a ~cross-post on pythonmac-sig:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/pythonmac-sig/2018-January/024283.html

-- 
Joni Orponen
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Matt Billenstein]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:42:07AM -0800, Chris Barker wrote:
>IT dept has been making me upgrade, so I"m going to guess 10.8 or newer...

OSX is in a sad state linking to system libs on the later releases -- maybe
10.11 and on, not sure of the exact release -- they stopped shipping the
headers for things like ssl and ffi since they don't want 3rd parties linking
to deprecated versions of those libraries versus, in the case of ssl, their
newer security framework.  Recommendation is to bundle what you need if you're
not using the framework -- something to think about.

thx

m

-- 
Matt Billenstein
m...@vazor.com
http://www.vazor.com/
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] OS-X builds for 3.7.0

[Ray Donnelly]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Chris Barker  wrote:
> Ned,
>
> It looks like you're still building OS-X the same way as in the past:
>
> Intel 32+64 bit, 10.6 compatibility
>
> Is that right?
>
> Might it be time for an update?
>
> Do we still need to support 32 bit?  From:
>
> https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/99640/how-old-are-macs-that-cannot-run-64-bit-applications
>
> There has not been a 32 bit-only Mac sold since 2006, and a out-of the box
> 32 bit OS since 2006 or 2007
>
> I can't find out what the older OS version Apple supports, but I know my IT
> dept has been making me upgrade, so I"m going to guess 10.8 or newer...
>
> And maybe we could even get rid of the "Framework" builds..

While we're making such macOS-build requests, any chance of building a
static interpreter too? We've been doing that on the Anaconda
Distribution since the 5.0 release in September and it seems to be
working well.

>
> -CHB
>
>
> --
>
> Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
> Oceanographer
>
> Emergency Response Division
> NOAA/NOS/OR(206) 526-6959   voice
> 7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
> Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception
>
> chris.bar...@noaa.gov
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/mingw.android%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com