Closed caseyduquettesc closed 2 years ago
Thank you for this PR and for reporting your validation!
In the time between you submitting this and me reviewing it, 3.10.2 was released. So we should upgrade to that.
Also, it looks like the MULTIARCH
configure code changed in 3.10.2 and 3.9.10, so the upgrade isn't as trivial as I'd like. I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to close this in favor of upgrading straight to 3.9.10 and 3.10.2 and addressing the configure changes. I'll hopefully merge that change within a few hours.
@indygreg I agree with your decision. Thanks for the updates and thanks for the project. It's quite wonderful
I think I have the 3.10.2 upgrade patch working. Just waiting on some final CI runs to confirm. Hopefully I push it to the main
branch within a few hours.
Closing this PR per discussion.
Not sure what tests you typically run. It at least built fine on mac amd64/aarch4 and linux amd64/aarch64.
I have a bazel toolchains project with a python test suite I'll run against these builds and report back if they look ok.
I ran our test suite, which basically consists of
pip install pycryptodome==3.4.11
to confirm native extension compilation worksplatform.python_version()
equals 3.10.1multiprocessing
,ctypes
,uuid
,lzma
,socket
,ssl
, andasyncio
All 4 interpreters passed. Can't validate the windows builds unfortunately and there's a TODO related to python 3.10.1 + windows I presume will need to be taken care of too.