Re: [yocto] source-less python
Seems like a shame not to add this feature for everyone to use... Yishai Jaffe On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 2:34 PM Alexander Kanavin wrote: > Making your own! You can have it added to the layer index for better > publicity. > > Alex > > On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:27, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > > > What layer would you suggest? > > > > Yishai Jaffe > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 2:21 PM Alexander Kanavin > wrote: > >> > >> You can start by placing it in a separate layer? > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:04, Yishai Jaffe > wrote: > >> > > >> > I assume by core you mean openembedded-core/poky, yes? > >> > > >> > So where would you add it to? > >> > > >> > Seems to me like a very useful feature that many people would use if > they knew the option exists. > >> > > >> > Also, I noticed that in the recipe for python there is a variable > named INCLUDE_PYC which does exactly what you think it would. This looks to > me like someone did think about the whole python size subject but didn't > exactly go through with it all the way. You can decide if to include pyc > files but not the opposite. Also, this feature which does exist only > applies to the python recipe but not to all other non-base python module > recipes. Maybe this can be added to setuptools3 bbclass? > >> > > >> > Yishai Jaffe > >> > > >> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 1:24 PM Alexander Kanavin < > alex.kana...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for > core > >> >> are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only > so > >> >> many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can > >> >> take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. > >> >> > >> >> Alex > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > Hi Alexander, > >> >> > > >> >> > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for > compiling core-image-minimal with python3-core: > >> >> > > >> >> > Normal compilation: > >> >> > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB > >> >> > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB > >> >> > > >> >> > With my pyc-only patch: > >> >> > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB > >> >> > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB > >> >> > > >> >> > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. > >> >> > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that > would mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would be > even a bigger percentage. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Yishai Jaffe > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin < > alex.kana...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all > of > >> >> >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for > >> >> >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings > that > >> >> >> can be gained in actual numbers? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the > >> >> >> wider python community. Is it? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Alex > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin < > f...@evolware.org> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Hello, > >> >> >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and > questions in Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles > to understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides > discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning > of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the > Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a > concrete conclusion. This is the issue: > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one > maybe) > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course > the Python experts will probably chime in and describe the > official/discussed position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like > mentioning that although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and > likely mostly works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed > solution. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Cheers, > >> >> >> > Federico > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe < > yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Hi, > >> >> >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for > source-less python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the > size of python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an > image feature. > >> >> >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. > >> >> >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > >> >> >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it > for review. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Thanks, > >> >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> >> >> > >>
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Making your own! You can have it added to the layer index for better publicity. Alex On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:27, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > What layer would you suggest? > > Yishai Jaffe > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 2:21 PM Alexander Kanavin > wrote: >> >> You can start by placing it in a separate layer? >> >> Alex >> >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:04, Yishai Jaffe wrote: >> > >> > I assume by core you mean openembedded-core/poky, yes? >> > >> > So where would you add it to? >> > >> > Seems to me like a very useful feature that many people would use if they >> > knew the option exists. >> > >> > Also, I noticed that in the recipe for python there is a variable named >> > INCLUDE_PYC which does exactly what you think it would. This looks to me >> > like someone did think about the whole python size subject but didn't >> > exactly go through with it all the way. You can decide if to include pyc >> > files but not the opposite. Also, this feature which does exist only >> > applies to the python recipe but not to all other non-base python module >> > recipes. Maybe this can be added to setuptools3 bbclass? >> > >> > Yishai Jaffe >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 1:24 PM Alexander Kanavin >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core >> >> are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so >> >> many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can >> >> take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Alexander, >> >> > >> >> > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling >> >> > core-image-minimal with python3-core: >> >> > >> >> > Normal compilation: >> >> > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB >> >> > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB >> >> > >> >> > With my pyc-only patch: >> >> > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB >> >> > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB >> >> > >> >> > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. >> >> > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that >> >> > would mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would >> >> > be even a bigger percentage. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Yishai Jaffe >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of >> >> >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for >> >> >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that >> >> >> can be gained in actual numbers? >> >> >> >> >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the >> >> >> wider python community. Is it? >> >> >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Hello, >> >> >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions >> >> >> > in Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to >> >> >> > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages >> >> >> > with problems due to this source-less management) and this then >> >> >> > sparked, besides discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly >> >> >> > end of July / beginning of August if someone interested searching >> >> >> > there), also an issue to the Python community, which albeit some >> >> >> > discussion I think never arrived to a concrete conclusion. This is >> >> >> > the issue: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also >> >> >> > the linked one maybe) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the >> >> >> > Python experts will probably chime in and describe the >> >> >> > official/discussed position of Yocto regarding to this, but just >> >> >> > felt like mentioning that although Buildroot is somehow offering >> >> >> > this right now (and likely mostly works as well!), it's not really a >> >> >> > so clean and/or agreed solution. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Cheers, >> >> >> > Federico >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for >> >> >> >> source-less python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles >> >> >> >> the size of python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being >> >> >> >> implemented as an image feature. >> >> >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. >> >> >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? >> >> >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for >> >> >> >> review. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58584):
Re: [yocto] source-less python
What layer would you suggest? Yishai Jaffe On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 2:21 PM Alexander Kanavin wrote: > You can start by placing it in a separate layer? > > Alex > > On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:04, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > > > I assume by core you mean openembedded-core/poky, yes? > > > > So where would you add it to? > > > > Seems to me like a very useful feature that many people would use if > they knew the option exists. > > > > Also, I noticed that in the recipe for python there is a variable named > INCLUDE_PYC which does exactly what you think it would. This looks to me > like someone did think about the whole python size subject but didn't > exactly go through with it all the way. You can decide if to include pyc > files but not the opposite. Also, this feature which does exist only > applies to the python recipe but not to all other non-base python module > recipes. Maybe this can be added to setuptools3 bbclass? > > > > Yishai Jaffe > > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 1:24 PM Alexander Kanavin > wrote: > >> > >> I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core > >> are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so > >> many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can > >> take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Alexander, > >> > > >> > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for > compiling core-image-minimal with python3-core: > >> > > >> > Normal compilation: > >> > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB > >> > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB > >> > > >> > With my pyc-only patch: > >> > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB > >> > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB > >> > > >> > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. > >> > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that > would mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would be > even a bigger percentage. > >> > > >> > > >> > Yishai Jaffe > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin < > alex.kana...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of > >> >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for > >> >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that > >> >> can be gained in actual numbers? > >> >> > >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the > >> >> wider python community. Is it? > >> >> > >> >> Alex > >> >> > >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Hello, > >> >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions > in Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides > discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning > of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the > Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a > concrete conclusion. This is the issue: > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one > maybe) > >> >> > > >> >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the > Python experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed > position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that > although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly > works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. > >> >> > > >> >> > Cheers, > >> >> > Federico > >> >> > > >> >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe < > yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Hi, > >> >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for > source-less python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the > size of python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an > image feature. > >> >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. > >> >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > >> >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for > review. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Thanks, > >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58583): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58583 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
You can start by placing it in a separate layer? Alex On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 13:04, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > I assume by core you mean openembedded-core/poky, yes? > > So where would you add it to? > > Seems to me like a very useful feature that many people would use if they > knew the option exists. > > Also, I noticed that in the recipe for python there is a variable named > INCLUDE_PYC which does exactly what you think it would. This looks to me like > someone did think about the whole python size subject but didn't exactly go > through with it all the way. You can decide if to include pyc files but not > the opposite. Also, this feature which does exist only applies to the python > recipe but not to all other non-base python module recipes. Maybe this can be > added to setuptools3 bbclass? > > Yishai Jaffe > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 1:24 PM Alexander Kanavin > wrote: >> >> I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core >> are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so >> many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can >> take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. >> >> Alex >> >> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe wrote: >> > >> > Hi Alexander, >> > >> > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling >> > core-image-minimal with python3-core: >> > >> > Normal compilation: >> > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB >> > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB >> > >> > With my pyc-only patch: >> > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB >> > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB >> > >> > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. >> > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that would >> > mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would be even a >> > bigger percentage. >> > >> > >> > Yishai Jaffe >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of >> >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for >> >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that >> >> can be gained in actual numbers? >> >> >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the >> >> wider python community. Is it? >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Hello, >> >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in >> >> > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to >> >> > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with >> >> > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, >> >> > besides discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July >> >> > / beginning of August if someone interested searching there), also an >> >> > issue to the Python community, which albeit some discussion I think >> >> > never arrived to a concrete conclusion. This is the issue: >> >> > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one >> >> > maybe) >> >> > >> >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python >> >> > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed >> >> > position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that >> >> > although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely >> >> > mostly works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed >> >> > solution. >> >> > >> >> > Cheers, >> >> > Federico >> >> > >> >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe >> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less >> >> >> python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of >> >> >> python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image >> >> >> feature. >> >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. >> >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? >> >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for >> >> >> review. >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58582): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58582 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
I assume by core you mean openembedded-core/poky, yes? So where would you add it to? Seems to me like a very useful feature that many people would use if they knew the option exists. Also, I noticed that in the recipe for python there is a variable named INCLUDE_PYC which does exactly what you think it would. This looks to me like someone did think about the whole python size subject but didn't exactly go through with it all the way. You can decide if to include pyc files but not the opposite. Also, this feature which does exist only applies to the python recipe but not to all other non-base python module recipes. Maybe this can be added to setuptools3 bbclass? Yishai Jaffe On Thu, Nov 17, 2022, 1:24 PM Alexander Kanavin wrote: > I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core > are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so > many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can > take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. > > Alex > > On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling > core-image-minimal with python3-core: > > > > Normal compilation: > > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB > > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB > > > > With my pyc-only patch: > > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB > > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB > > > > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. > > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that would > mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would be even a > bigger percentage. > > > > > > Yishai Jaffe > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin < > alex.kana...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of > >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for > >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that > >> can be gained in actual numbers? > >> > >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the > >> wider python community. Is it? > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin > wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > Hello, > >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides > discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning > of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the > Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a > concrete conclusion. This is the issue: > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one > maybe) > >> > > >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the > Python experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed > position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that > although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly > works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Federico > >> > > >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe < > yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >> >> > >> >> Hi, > >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less > python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python > on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. > >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for > review. > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> Yishai Jaffe > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58581): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58581 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it. Alex On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe wrote: > > Hi Alexander, > > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling > core-image-minimal with python3-core: > > Normal compilation: > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB > > With my pyc-only patch: > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB > > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that would mean > that if you had an image with more python packages it would be even a bigger > percentage. > > > Yishai Jaffe > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin > wrote: >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that >> can be gained in actual numbers? >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the >> wider python community. Is it? >> >> Alex >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin wrote: >> > >> > >> > Hello, >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in >> > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to >> > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with >> > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, >> > besides discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / >> > beginning of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue >> > to the Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never >> > arrived to a concrete conclusion. This is the issue: >> > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one >> > maybe) >> > >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python >> > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed >> > position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that >> > although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly >> > works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Federico >> > >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less >> >> python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of >> >> python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image >> >> feature. >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58580): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58580 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Hi Alexander, After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling core-image-minimal with python3-core: Normal compilation: tar.bz2 - 6.6MB squashfs-xz - 6.1MB With my pyc-only patch: tar.bz2 - 5.8MB squashfs-xz - 5.2MB So that's about a 15% decrease in size. Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that would mean that if you had an image with more python packages it would be even a bigger percentage. Yishai Jaffe On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin wrote: > Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of > the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for > specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that > can be gained in actual numbers? > > Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the > wider python community. Is it? > > Alex > > On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides > discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning > of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the > Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a > concrete conclusion. This is the issue: > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one > maybe) > > > > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed position > of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that although > Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly works as > well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. > > > > Cheers, > > Federico > > > > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe < > yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >> > >> Hi, > >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less > python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python > on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. > >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Yishai Jaffe > >> Yishai Jaffe > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58579): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58579 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Hello Alex, Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 16:12 Alexander Kanavin < alex.kana...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of > the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for > specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that > can be gained in actual numbers? > Just to go with some concrete numbers from a Buildroot example I have under my hands, with just very basic Python 3.10 support (so no additional modules, just what gets in with only BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON3=y) the difference of size you have between using PYC only (BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON3_PYC_ONLY=y) and source only (BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON3_PY_ONLY=y) of the generated /usr/lib/python3.10 is 14Mb vs 17Mb. So roughly a 20% ? Besides the space savings, using the PYC only brings also a speedup in startup of course. But strictly on space savings: one should also take into account that the difference we see is not counting the fact that very often then one has a compressed filesystem underneath. This is especially true when you have space constrained embedded devices where you'd like to save space, but not necessarily that -20% is effective, once you take into account the filesystem compression. (please note: not the original thread initiator asking to support this in Yocto, just chimed in soon after as dealed with this in different context ;-) ) > > Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the > wider python community. Is it? > That is the problem IMO: if you look at the linked github issue I posted last, I don't think there is a full agreement. So while things mostly work (and pretty well), there are some edge cases for sure (ie trivially handling pyc compiled scripts or modules that could be executed as scripts as well as modules). (here is some discussion: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2022-August/648686.html ) Cheers, Federico > > Alex > > On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides > discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning > of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the > Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a > concrete conclusion. This is the issue: > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one > maybe) > > > > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed position > of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that although > Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly works as > well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. > > > > Cheers, > > Federico > > > > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe < > yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >> > >> Hi, > >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less > python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python > on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. > >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Yishai Jaffe > >> Yishai Jaffe > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58553): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58553 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that can be gained in actual numbers? Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the wider python community. Is it? Alex On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin wrote: > > > Hello, > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to understand > the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with problems due to > this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides discussions in > the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning of August if > someone interested searching there), also an issue to the Python community, > which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a concrete conclusion. > This is the issue: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also > the linked one maybe) > > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed position > of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that although > Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly works as > well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. > > Cheers, > Federico > > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe > ha scritto: >> >> Hi, >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less python >> on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python on the >> rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. >> >> Thanks, >> Yishai Jaffe >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58550): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58550 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Hello, Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, besides discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / beginning of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue to the Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never arrived to a concrete conclusion. This is the issue: https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one maybe) These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. Cheers, Federico Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe ha scritto: > Hi, > I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less > python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python > on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > I know that in buildroot it is supported. > Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. > > Thanks, > Yishai Jaffe > Yishai Jaffe > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58549): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58549 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
Hi,
So after a little bit of research, I've implemented this feature in poky.
The way buildroot works, is that it doesn't create any .pyc files during
the build process of single packages but has a post rootfs hook that (If
that's what the user has configured) compiles the .py files into .pyc files
and removes the .py files.
The compilation to .pyc files is done using a small script that uses
python's py_compile module.
I have attached the diff to poky for implementation of this feature and the
pycompile.py script.
I would love to get your input on this.
Another thing I noticed while doing this research was that the python
recipe has a variable called INCLUDE_PYCS that decides if to include the
.pyc files in the package. This is nice but why not implement this in the
rest of the python package recipes? It can be added to setuptools3.bbclass
or something like that. What do you think?
Thanks a lot,
John
בתאריך יום ה׳, 23 ביוני 2022 ב-19:10 מאת Ross Burton <
ross.bur...@arm.com>:
> On 23 Jun 2022, at 23:40, Aurum Nitrogen via lists.yoctoproject.org
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less
> python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python
> on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature.
> > I know that in buildroot it is supported.
> > Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue?
>
>
> There’s an open issue:
> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6434
>
> The easiest implementation would be a rootfs-time postprocessing step
> where you compile every .py file, and then delete the .py. Is this what
> buildroot does?
>
> This does break feeds, but the alternative (of changing how packaging is
> done) would be a lot more invasive.
>
> Ross
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
>
#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""
Byte compile all .py files from provided directories. This script is an
alternative implementation of compileall.compile_dir written with
cross-compilation in mind.
"""
import argparse
import os
import py_compile
import re
import sys
def compile_one(host_path, strip_root=None, verbose=False):
"""
Compile a .py file into a .pyc file located next to it.
:arg host_path:
Absolute path to the file to compile on the host running the build.
:arg strip_root:
Prefix to remove from the original source paths encoded in compiled
files.
:arg verbose:
Print compiled file paths.
"""
if os.path.islink(host_path) or not os.path.isfile(host_path):
return # only compile real files
if not re.match(r"^[_A-Za-z][_A-Za-z0-9]*\.py$",
os.path.basename(host_path)):
return # only compile "importable" python modules
if strip_root is not None:
# determine the runtime path of the file (i.e.: relative path to root
# dir prepended with "/").
runtime_path = os.path.join("/", os.path.relpath(host_path, strip_root))
else:
runtime_path = host_path
if verbose:
print(" PYC {}".format(runtime_path))
# will raise an error if the file cannot be compiled
py_compile.compile(host_path, cfile=host_path + "c",
dfile=runtime_path, doraise=True)
def existing_dir_abs(arg):
"""
argparse type callback that checks that argument is a directory and returns
its absolute path.
"""
if not os.path.isdir(arg):
raise argparse.ArgumentTypeError('no such directory: {!r}'.format(arg))
return os.path.abspath(arg)
def main():
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description=__doc__)
parser.add_argument("dirs", metavar="DIR", nargs="+", type=existing_dir_abs,
help="Directory to recursively scan and compile")
parser.add_argument("--strip-root", metavar="ROOT", type=existing_dir_abs,
help="""
Prefix to remove from the original source paths encoded
in compiled files
""")
parser.add_argument("--verbose", action="store_true",
help="Print compiled files")
args = parser.parse_args()
try:
for d in args.dirs:
if args.strip_root and ".." in os.path.relpath(d, args.strip_root):
parser.error("DIR: not inside ROOT dir: {!r}".format(d))
for parent, _, files in os.walk(d):
for f in files:
compile_one(os.path.join(parent, f), args.strip_root,
args.verbose)
except Exception as e:
print("error: {}".format(e))
return 1
return
Re: [yocto] source-less python
On 23 Jun 2022, at 23:40, Aurum Nitrogen via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > > Hi, > I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less python > on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python on the > rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > I know that in buildroot it is supported. > Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? There’s an open issue: https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6434 The easiest implementation would be a rootfs-time postprocessing step where you compile every .py file, and then delete the .py. Is this what buildroot does? This does break feeds, but the alternative (of changing how packaging is done) would be a lot more invasive. Ross IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#57386): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/57386 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/91944424/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [yocto] source-less python
I don't remember any such discussion. If you want this to happen, you are welcome to develop the feature. Alex On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 16:39, Aurum Nitrogen wrote: > > Hi, > I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less python > on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of python on the > rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image feature. > I know that in buildroot it is supported. > Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? > > Thanks, > John > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#57384): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/57384 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/91944424/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
