Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

python.pkgs.cython: hash backport & 0.29.14 -> 0.29.15 #74388

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Dec 1, 2019
Merged

python.pkgs.cython: hash backport & 0.29.14 -> 0.29.15 #74388

merged 2 commits into from Dec 1, 2019

Conversation

timokau
Copy link
Member

@timokau timokau commented Nov 27, 2019

Motivation for this change

cython/cython#2752 has already been accepted
upstream, is minimally invasive (only adds a feature, shouldn't break
any existing code) and is needed for the sage python3 update. Sage needs
this capability because it defines its own integer type.

While I was at it I also updated Cython to the latest point release.

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nix-review --run "nix-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.
Notify maintainers

cc @FRidh

@timokau
python.pkgs.Cython: backport fix for non-int hashes
4453a3d 
cython/cython#2752 has already been accepted
upstream, is minimally invasive (only adds a feature, shouldn't break
any existing code) and is needed for the sage python3 update. Sage needs
this capability because it defines its own integer type.
@timokau
python.pkgs.Cython: 0.29.14 -> 0.29.15
fa4bbef
@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

40k rebuilds :(

jonringer
jonringer reviewed Nov 28, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jonringer jonringer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

not sure if all of these are broken on staging, but:

13932 package failed to build:
AgdaStdlib DisnixWebService EmptyEpsilon MMA OVMF OVMF-CSM OVMF-secureBoot R SDL SDL2 
...

@FRidh FRidh self-assigned this Nov 28, 2019
@timokau
Copy link
Member Author

timokau commented Nov 28, 2019 •
edited

I cannot reproduce this. R builds on this branch, as well as on current staging. Maybe there was some breakage on staging HEAD at the time of your testing.

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

possible

@FRidh FRidh added this to Needs review in Staging Nov 30, 2019
@FRidh FRidh merged commit 47f4ddf into NixOS:staging Dec 1, 2019
Staging automation moved this from Needs review to Done Dec 1, 2019
@timokau timokau deleted the cython-hash-backport branch December 1, 2019 22:57
@bgamari
Copy link
Contributor

bgamari commented Dec 2, 2019

I don't understand what is going on here; Cython 0.29.15 is not available on PyPI.

timokau added a commit to timokau/nixpkgs that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2019
@timokau
Revert "python.pkgs.Cython: 0.29.14 -> 0.29.15"
12b167e 
This reverts commit fa4bbef.

The update seems to be no longer available. See
NixOS#74388 (comment).
@timokau timokau mentioned this pull request Dec 2, 2019
Merged
10 tasks
@timokau
Copy link
Member Author

timokau commented Dec 2, 2019

That is weird. Its not on the github releases page either.

I don't remember where I saw the update, but it must've been either the releases page or pypi. Maybe they recalled it? Is that possible?

Either way, we should probably revert that part of this PR. #74869

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jonringer jonringer jonringer left review comments

@FRidh FRidh Awaiting requested review from FRidh

Assignees

@FRidh FRidh

Labels
6.topic: python 10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ 10.rebuild-darwin: 5001+ 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+
Projects
Staging
  
Done
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@timokau @jonringer @bgamari @FRidh