llvmlite v0.30.0 #21

regro-cf-autotick-bot · 2019-10-10T20:16:32Z

It is very likely that the current package version for this feedstock is out of date.
Notes for merging this PR:

Feel free to push to the bot's branch to update this PR if needed.
The bot will almost always only open one PR per version.
Checklist before merging this PR:

Dependencies have been updated if changed
Tests have passed
Updated license if changed and license_file is packaged

Note that the bot will stop issuing PRs if more than 3 Version bump PRs generated by the bot are open. If you don't want to package a particular version please close the PR

If this PR was opened in error or needs to be updated please add the bot-rerun label to this PR. The bot will close this PR and schedule another one.

_{This PR was created by the cf-regro-autotick-bot.

The cf-regro-autotick-bot is a service to automatically track the dependency graph, migrate packages, and propose package version updates for conda-forge. If you would like a local version of this bot, you might consider using rever. Rever is a tool for automating software releases and forms the backbone of the bot's conda-forge PRing capability. Rever is both conda (conda install -c conda-forge rever) and pip (pip install re-ver) installable.

Finally, feel free to drop us a line if there are any issues!}

…da-forge-pinning 2019.10.08

conda-forge-linter · 2019-10-10T20:16:35Z

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

jakirkham · 2019-10-17T18:25:14Z

@isuruf, it looks like LLVM packaging has undergone some restructuring. How should we be depending on it in llvmlite? In particular we are now seeing an libllvmlite.so dependency is missing.

isuruf · 2019-10-17T18:28:52Z

You should also depend on llvm in host which would add the correct run_exports. llvmdev doesn't add a run_exports since packages usually link statically, but looks like llvmlite is happy with shared linking.

jakirkham · 2019-10-17T18:34:07Z

@stuartarchibald, is it ok if we start using dynamic linking to build llvmlite or does that cause issues?

isuruf

Comment on meta.yaml's Line 23 does not apply anymore. You can depend on compiler('c') in OSX too.

stuartarchibald · 2019-10-21T13:51:55Z

@stuartarchibald, is it ok if we start using dynamic linking to build llvmlite or does that cause issues?

Technically it may be ok. However this should probably be considered: http://llvmlite.pydata.org/en/latest/admin-guide/install.html#why-static-linking-to-llvm, I would not anticipate Numba mainline switching to dynamic.

jakirkham · 2019-10-21T20:01:05Z

@isuruf, given that it sounds like Numba developers prefer static linking here, how can we force that to happen?

isuruf · 2019-10-21T20:03:38Z

None of the conditions in the linked article apply to us. Nevertheless if you want to link with the static libraries, you have to modify the cmake files in llvmlite to link statically when both static ones and dynamic are available.

jakirkham · 2019-10-21T20:43:32Z

The install size concern applies though, right? Agree that the other points don't matter to us.

jakirkham · 2019-10-21T20:45:33Z

Does this test failure meaning anything to you @stuartarchibald?

======================================================================
FAIL: test_linux (llvmlite.tests.test_binding.TestDependencies)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/conda/feedstock_root/build_artifacts/llvmlite_1571689347008/_test_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeho/lib/python3.7/site-packages/llvmlite/tests/test_binding.py", line 239, in test_linux
    self.fail("failed parsing dependencies? got %r" % (deps,))
AssertionError: failed parsing dependencies? got {'libgcc_s', 'libLLVM-8', 'ld-linux-x86-64', 'libc'}

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ref: https://dev.azure.com/conda-forge/feedstock-builds/_build/results?buildId=82974&view=logs

isuruf · 2019-10-21T20:49:23Z

The install size concern applies though, right? Agree that the other points don't matter to us.

True, but that concern is true for all other conda-forge packages and we are happy with dynamic linking in them.

isuruf · 2019-10-21T21:02:15Z

That test doesn't matter. when statically linking with llvm, libpthread is also linked in, which is not the case when dynamically linking and the test is especting libpthread to be linked in.

stuartarchibald · 2019-10-22T10:06:15Z

Does this test failure meaning anything to you @stuartarchibald?

======================================================================
FAIL: test_linux (llvmlite.tests.test_binding.TestDependencies)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/conda/feedstock_root/build_artifacts/llvmlite_1571689347008/_test_env_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placehold_placeho/lib/python3.7/site-packages/llvmlite/tests/test_binding.py", line 239, in test_linux
    self.fail("failed parsing dependencies? got %r" % (deps,))
AssertionError: failed parsing dependencies? got {'libgcc_s', 'libLLVM-8', 'ld-linux-x86-64', 'libc'}

----------------------------------------------------------------------

ref: https://dev.azure.com/conda-forge/feedstock-builds/_build/results?buildId=82974&view=logs

I think this would be an expected fail as CF is not building llvmlite in the manner prescribed by the docs, you may wish to patch this with a fix or patch to ignore.

This test is based around static linking of LLVM, which conda-forge no longer does. So just patch out this test in the conda-forge build.

recipe/build.sh

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T02:31:44Z

We are going to give dynamic linking a go, @stuartarchibald. Hope that is ok. This is more inline with how we building things in conda-forge anyways. If it becomes problematic, happy to revisit.

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T02:38:13Z

@isuruf, did I get all of your requested changes? GitHub is showing that there may be something I missed. Though am not seeing it atm.

isuruf · 2019-10-25T02:43:51Z

recipe/skip_TestDependencies.patch

+-    """
+-
+-    @unittest.skipUnless(sys.platform.startswith('linux'), "Linux-specific test")
+-    @unittest.skipUnless(os.environ.get('LLVMLITE_DIST_TEST'), "Distribution-specific test")


Just noticed this. If you remove https://github.com/conda-forge/llvmlite-feedstock/blob/master/recipe/run_test.py#L5, then this test will be skipped.

Good catch. Appears to only be used for this test too. Will use that instead. Thanks.

I left it in, but set it to an empty string. That way if Anaconda or other care about enabling this again, they can do that easily.

This reverts commit b699c44.

These tests only check that `llvmlite` was statically linked. As we are no longer statically, go ahead and skip these tests and explain why. Try to keep it easy for others to change this option if they need to.

Fixed

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T03:18:21Z

recipe/meta.yaml

@@ -33,14 +28,13 @@ requirements:
  host:
    - python
    - llvmdev 8.0.*
+    - llvm 8.0.*
    - enum34          # [py27]
    # llvmdev is built with libz compression support
    - zlib            # [unix]


Actually do we still need this?

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T03:18:43Z

recipe/meta.yaml

@@ -33,14 +28,13 @@ requirements:
  host:
    - python
    - llvmdev 8.0.*


Should this have been dropped?

Does llvmlite support 9.0.0 ?

Was more asking as there is llvmdev and llvm listed here. Though I might just be unaware of how the split was done.

llvm is a dependency of llvmdev. Only llvm has the run_exports because people use llvmdev for static linking.

llvmdev is needed for the cmake files and headers

Ah ok. Thanks for explaining that. 🙂

Does llvmlite support 9.0.0 ?

Unknown at present, it's scheduled for testing.

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T03:19:37Z

Sorry had a couple more questions that I only thought of after. Can update things if needed.

stuartarchibald · 2019-10-25T13:56:06Z

We are going to give dynamic linking a go, @stuartarchibald. Hope that is ok. This is more inline with how we building things in conda-forge anyways. If it becomes problematic, happy to revisit.

Sure, if that matches your use case better then it's worth a try. I cannot comment on how well it'll work in practice, would be interested in hearing of any notable findings, thanks!

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T14:44:33Z

Of course! Happy to share how things go 😄

jakirkham · 2019-10-25T14:44:51Z

Also thanks for your help here. 🙂

stuartarchibald · 2019-10-28T10:58:41Z

No problem, thanks for getting the build done!

regro-cf-autotick-bot added 2 commits October 10, 2019 20:15

updated v0.30.0

a7adaef

MNT: Re-rendered with conda-build 3.18.9, conda-smithy 3.5.0, and con…

a058b1e

…da-forge-pinning 2019.10.08

isuruf previously requested changes Oct 17, 2019

View reviewed changes

marcelotrevisani mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2019

numba v0.46.0 conda-forge/numba-feedstock#32

Merged

3 tasks

isuruf added 4 commits October 21, 2019 15:05

Correct deps

643aea3

Simplify build.sh

a5b2c72

Remove script_env

bca6fde

Update build.sh

001a50e

Skip TestDependencies on Linux

b699c44

This test is based around static linking of LLVM, which conda-forge no longer does. So just patch out this test in the conda-forge build.

isuruf reviewed Oct 25, 2019

View reviewed changes

recipe/build.sh Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Stop statically linking stdlibc++

32200f0

isuruf reviewed Oct 25, 2019

View reviewed changes

jakirkham added 2 commits October 24, 2019 22:52

Revert "Skip TestDependencies on Linux"

486d5e9

This reverts commit b699c44.

Disable distribution tests

cba528a

These tests only check that `llvmlite` was statically linked. As we are no longer statically, go ahead and skip these tests and explain why. Try to keep it easy for others to change this option if they need to.

jakirkham merged commit 1fa3ebd into conda-forge:master Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham reviewed Oct 25, 2019

View reviewed changes

regro-cf-autotick-bot deleted the 0.30.0 branch October 25, 2019 04:11

jakirkham mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2023

llvmlite rebuild and publishing to conda-forge channel (to include SVML patch changes) #72

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

llvmlite v0.30.0 #21

llvmlite v0.30.0 #21

regro-cf-autotick-bot commented Oct 10, 2019

conda-forge-linter commented Oct 10, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 17, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 17, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 17, 2019

isuruf left a comment

stuartarchibald commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 22, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

isuruf Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

isuruf Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

isuruf Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

isuruf Oct 25, 2019

isuruf Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham Oct 25, 2019

stuartarchibald Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 28, 2019

llvmlite v0.30.0 #21

llvmlite v0.30.0 #21

Conversation

regro-cf-autotick-bot commented Oct 10, 2019

conda-forge-linter commented Oct 10, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 17, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 17, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 17, 2019

isuruf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

stuartarchibald commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

isuruf commented Oct 21, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 22, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

jakirkham commented Oct 25, 2019

stuartarchibald commented Oct 28, 2019