Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!news.servidellagleba.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Andreas Tille Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Helping hands needed to upgrade scipy Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 08:30:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Drew Parsons X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Wed Jan 18 07:27:50 2023 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.98 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MURPHY_DRUGS_REL8=0.02] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate:hard: -3.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/20728 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/Y8efYSLl4g/UfxQs@an3as.eu Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 63 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: Debian Python , Debian Science List , Jochen Sprickerhof X-Original-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 08:27:29 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14846 Hi Drew, Am Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 02:45:31AM +0100 schrieb Drew Parsons: > On 2023-01-17 18:12, Andreas Tille wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I upgraded the experimental branch of scipy to contain the submodules > > upstream includes. I'm *not* convinced that we need them all - > > hopefully we can get rid of boost (but upstream has some patches here) > > and scipy-mathjax. > > > > For the moment I've tried to build the experimental branch and ended > > up with some issue where cython can't be found (should be cython3 for > > sure)[1]. > > > > Unfortunately my spare time is occupied now by other more urgent tasks. > > I'd be happy if someone else could review / pick up / continue from > > here. > > > The problem was not meson as such, but that upstream is only half using > meson. They must have decided they don't trust the way meson handles > cython, and set up their own custom build tools for it, see > https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/15407 > > That is, they hard-coded the cython executable name in > scipy/_build_utils/cythoner.py > > They actually did the same already in the old setuptools build > (tools/cythonize.py), but we didn't notice since they had the breaking > cython call wrapped in a try block which inspected a Cython class from > inside python. I raised an Issue about whether cythoner.py should do the > same in https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/17808 > We could argue the fault is debian's for not providing a cython executable > (it does have -2 and -3 options for choosing the python version to work > with). Thanks for the clarification. > I figure also we should use python3-mesonpy, since it's what upstream uses. > Best not to diverge too far from their build method I think. I'm perfectly fine with this approach. That's why I initially pushed meson-python to new. I've just dput meson-python_0.12.0-2_source to let it migrate to testing. My attempt to use plain meson (as per upstream readme) was just to shorten the time while meson-python was in new queue. > I've pushed commits updating cythoner.py to point cythoner.py at cython3. > The main build now completes. Have to clean up test handling next: > "FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: > '/projects/python/build/scipy/.coveragerc' Nice. Hope my preparation (of meson-python and the multi-source tarball) helped to move forward. Please double check whether we really need the boost code copy. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de