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

[index] fix chmod of keyvimerger binary #45

Closed

Conversation

hendrikmuhs
Copy link
Contributor

the original implementation turned out to be broken. This change fixes keyvimerger access rights and adds a test for it

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Feb 18, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.04%) to 93.223% when pulling 1bd8675 on hendrikmuhs:index-fix-keyvimerger_install into 7fc055b on KeyviDev:index.

@hendrikmuhs
Copy link
Contributor Author

hendrikmuhs commented Feb 19, 2018

After some more testing it seems that the current approach will not work for wheel packages. Wheels have no execution hook but simply unzip the package and change permissions (The wheel still has '+x' on the binary, but after installation it is reset).

Therefore I need a different approach, possible solutions:

  • create a python version and install it as script and/or use keyvi cli (problem: different style of cmd arguments)
  • at runtime copy the binary to a tmp location with proper access rights and use that
  • provide a script that needs to be run after installation that fixes rights (could be in combination with the above as fallback)
  • implement in-process merge and only use that as a fallback

@hendrikmuhs
Copy link
Contributor Author

It goes into the right direction:

Providing the binary works, some build fail due to full static linkage:

  • on manylinux we lack a static build of boost
  • on mac full static linkage is not possible, but I need to link it with minimal dependencies as we already do for the python bindings

Both is complicated to fix, maybe I still go with the option of a python script.

@narekgharibyan
Copy link
Member

I think python script is better option. Also we will not need to build whole keyvi from setup.py and ship with package, but just extension part.

@hendrikmuhs
Copy link
Contributor Author

closing in favor of #48

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants