Re: [EPEL-devel] Re: python3.11-rpm to EPEL 9
On 16. 05. 23 15:44, Maxwell G wrote:
On Tue May 16, 2023 at 11:04 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 15. 05. 23 16:49, Maxwell G wrote:
>> On Mon May 15, 2023 at 12:14 +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm working on adding python3.11-rpm to EPEL 9 and EPEL 9 Next.
>>>
>>> See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-rpm/pull-request/3 and 4.
>>
>> Cool!
>>
>>> I decided to reuse the python3-rpm component (currently epel7 only). Let me
>>> know if I should not.
>>
>> Are we able to build for multiple Python versions out of the same
>> specfile?
>
> It's possible, but it's not nice.
>
> In principle, this works:
>
> %build
> %define py3x_build() %{global python3_pkgversion %1}%py3_build
> %py3x_build 39
> %py3x_build 3.11
>
> %install
> %define py3x_install() %{global python3_pkgversion %1}%py3_install
> %py3x_install 39
> %py3x_install 3.11
>
> But with a project like RPM, we might need to run configure multiple times as
> well and create separate working directories. Will need to check.
Yeah, that could work,
but I'd change %{global python3_pkgversion %1} to
%{define python3_pkgversion %1} in the py3x_* macro definitions so you
only change the definition of %python3_pkgversion within those macros'
scopes.
>> Unless there's some other way to work around this, I'd use a
>> python3.11-rpm or python3.11-rpm-epel component like we've been doing
>> for the other alt python stacks in RHEL 8.
>
> I consider the "not nice" way easier, as it will only require to keep one
> package synced with c8s rpm, and not many. Will try to hack it up and show how
> it looks like.
I tend to agree. Syncing packages with RHEL and CentOS Stream is
difficult and tedious so better to limit the amount of times you have to
do it. Carl's new EPEL 10 proposal will hopefully with this.
OK, here's an EPEL 8 demo with multiple Python versions:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-rpm/pull-request/5
(I am not sure if Python 3.11 is available in the EPEL 8 buildroot already, but
if it is not, we can probably just wait a bit instead of building this in EPEL
8 Next first.)
Unfortunately the trick with %{global python3_pkgversion %1} inside a %define
seemed to work on Fedora 37, but RHEL 8 did not like it (especially with
multiline macros) an I was unable to make it work. Instead, I kept %global'ing
%python3_pkgversion back and forth.
It is not as bad as expected actually, this version of RPM still supports
building and installing the Python bindings via distutils, so I only needed to
run configure once.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok