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

unicorn: provide Python bindings in a separate recipe. #8112

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

OscarL
Copy link
Contributor

@OscarL OscarL commented Mar 26, 2023

This change allows to:

  • Decouple the building of the Python bindings (otherwise needs to rebuild full libunicorn.so for each build of the bindings).
  • Be able to provide bindings for multiple Python versions.

The tiny patch is the same as one already applied upstream 3 weeks ago, so it could be dropped on next release/update.

Also:

  • Removed static library.
  • Disabled building of tests.

This change allows to:

- Decouple the building of the Python bindings (otherwise needs to rebuild
  full libunicorn.so for each build of the bindings).
- Be able to provide bindings for multiple Python versions.

The tiny patch is the same as one already applied upstream 3 weeks ago, so
it could be dropped on next release/update.

Also:

- Removed static library.
- Disabled building of tests.
@OscarL
Copy link
Contributor Author

OscarL commented Mar 26, 2023

In case the recipe split is not desired, here's an alternative recipe cleanup (in collaboration with @Begasus), that leaves it as a single recipe, but allows for easier changes in the supported Python version.

@korli
Copy link
Contributor

korli commented Mar 26, 2023

@OscarL I don't know any recipes actually using unicorn, what's the usecase for python bindings?

@OscarL
Copy link
Contributor Author

OscarL commented Mar 26, 2023

@korli no idea, really. Just saw them there in the original recipe, and trying to clean that part was a bit painful (due to having to run the whole recipe), so separating them seemed like a good option to me.

But the alternative I've linked in a comment above also works, or guess we could drop its bindings altogether, if they're not really useful?

Paging @kallisti5 :-)

@OscarL
Copy link
Contributor Author

OscarL commented May 14, 2023

Closing in favor of #8641.

@OscarL OscarL closed this May 14, 2023
@OscarL OscarL deleted the unicorn-split-recipes branch May 14, 2023 19:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants