> -----Original Message----- > From: Nathaniel Smith [mailto:n...@pobox.com] > Sent: terça-feira, 14 de fevereiro de 2017 06:31 > To: Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > Cc: Leonardo Bianconi <leonardo.bianc...@eldorado.org.br>; wheel- > build...@python.org > Subject: Re: [Wheel-builders] Wheel files for PPC64le > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > > Sorry for the delayed reply (I've been travelling for the past few weeks and > > hence only intermittently polling various mailing lists). > > > > While your approach seems basically sound to me, the main challenge I see > > here is that it means the ppc64le manylinux1 build environment will be > > starkly different from that for other architectures. That's not necessarily > > an insurmountable problem, but it does mean that the main folks you need > > agreement from are the https://github.com/pypa/manylinux/ maintainers. > > I don't think we'd have any objections, but I don't think we'd be able > to help much either. The current infrastructure for the manylinux > docker images etc. is dependent on Travis-CI to run the builds, and > Travis-CI obviously doesn't provide any support for ppc64le builds. So > you're going to need your own PEP, your own image build scripts, and > your own infrastructure to run them. The only thing that can obviously > be shared is the pypa docker repository for distributing the final > images; we can get you access there when you're ready if you do decide > to go the docker route.
There is the cross-compilation option as Nick mentioned (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/wheel-builders/2017-January/000247.html), The problem is that no tests can be run to ppc64le. Does Travis-CI run any tests currently? > > Possibly it would be less confusing to use a different name for these, > like ppc64lelinux1 or something? If only to cut down on the number of > times you have to explain why it's okay that ppc64le is still using > manylinux1 when x86{,-64} has moved on to manylinux2. What would be the reason for the tag "manylinux1" be deprecated? Shouldn't any reason be applied for all architectures? The only way I see it differ is if something change related with the base OS system, as it is different for each one. But as we are using the same base library list, it would be hard to happen, wouldn't it? I have no objection on changing the name, I just would like to make things similar for both arch, as would be easier for maintaining. > > -n > > -- > Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ Wheel-builders mailing list Wheel-builders@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/wheel-builders
