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

Build Arm64 container for Manylinux2014_aarch64 #297

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 26, 2020

Conversation

geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor

Containers not supported Arm64

  • Alpine Linux -- missing rustup precompiled binary on rust-lang site
  • manylinux1 -- x86 only
  • manylinux2010 -- x86 only

Remaining containers are built using buildx inside github actions to push a manifest to the docker repository to allow tags to contain multiple architectures. Doing a docker pull on x86 or Arm64 machines will pull the expected container.

Tested in my own docker account and see all the containers with both x86 and arm64 hashes.

@alex
Copy link
Member

alex commented Aug 18, 2020

Do you know if there's a bug on the rust side for getting aarch64-unknown-linux-musl rustc builds?

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

There is no artifact for aarch64-unknown-linux-musl, and rust also omits it as a supported binary: https://forge.rust-lang.org/infra/other-installation-methods.html

@alex
Copy link
Member

alex commented Aug 18, 2020 via email

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

geoffreyblake commented Aug 18, 2020 via email

@alex
Copy link
Member

alex commented Aug 18, 2020 via email

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

geoffreyblake commented Aug 19, 2020 via email

@alex
Copy link
Member

alex commented Aug 19, 2020 via email

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

Need to correct this issue: pypa/manylinux#735
Before pushing these container builds.

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

This PR is outstanding to fix the root cause of failed Arm builds: pypa/manylinux#739

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

pypa/manylinux#739 has been merged and the new manylinux2014_aarch64 container has been uploaded. Is there anything else @alex you need to see in this PR before merging?

@reaperhulk
Copy link
Member

Right now we don't have an intention to test against aarch64 docker images. We may do that in the future so it's very helpful to see a path to building those sanely, but for the moment the only docker image I think we need is manylinux2014 aarch64. If you could update this PR to just do that for the moment we can get that merged quickly.

@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any reason why you don't want all the containers done now? I'll update this with just the manylinux part for now.

@geoffreyblake geoffreyblake force-pushed the arm64_container_build branch 3 times, most recently from e769fda to 175d67f Compare August 26, 2020 16:06
@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

@reaperhulk , changes backed out and just the manylinux2014_aarch64 is there. Let me know if there are other changes needed.

@geoffreyblake geoffreyblake changed the title Build Arm64 containers for all targets except Alpine and ManyLinux1, ManyLinux2010 Build Arm64 container for Manylinux2014_aarch64 Aug 26, 2020
@reaperhulk
Copy link
Member

In general we try not to have infrastructure/artifacts/builds that we don't use. Given the size of our CI it makes it difficult to reason about everything if there are pieces that are part of the machinery but aren't being used. I've created the docker hub repo for the new manylinux2014 image so we should be set for merge and push. Let's see how it goes 😄

@reaperhulk reaperhulk merged commit cefef83 into pyca:master Aug 26, 2020
@geoffreyblake
Copy link
Contributor Author

That makes sense to a degree, but as we inch closer to an aarch64 release, I would suspect you want to test on the platforms you support as much as possible. But for now I'm happy to get the manylinux2014 container in, now its possible to build the wheels.

@alex
Copy link
Member

alex commented Aug 26, 2020 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants