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
Race when copying package files #26990
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:2
This is basically a duplicate of #26018, particularly #26018 comment:4, though I'm not positive if the branch there fixes it for all cases. |
comment:3
Actually I'm not sure this is #26018, but it still looks like a fluke. How could you get:
after
unless somehow the same package was being installed twice simultaneously? |
comment:4
The The success message is written to stdout, and the error message to stderr. Both are independently buffered streams, it is to be expected that they are out of order. |
comment:5
I understand that, but the error case is:
i.e. it should have exited the script before the success message was ever echoed at all. |
comment:6
The first 'Successfully installed' is printed by pip, which is also why its before the 'Removed build tracker...' |
comment:7
Yes, I just realized that. It's the same exact message so it's confusing. In that case I do believe this is a duplicate. |
comment:8
So this is still a duplicate of #26018. The problem with the So I need to update #26018 to include |
comment:9
#26018 seems to have stalled I'm also not convinced that its the right fix, imho we just shoudn't copy over pyc files for installation (they contain hardcoded absolute paths). Nothing good can come out of this. |
comment:11
That's a good point about the filename pyc files, but I'm not sure that's really the issue here. Besides, I believe there are ways (e.g., maybe with the compileall module) to deal with that, though I haven't tried. #26018 doesn't appear to be stalled for any good reason. I set it to needs_review 7 months, no one did anything, and now it needs to be rebased again. |
comment:12
Perhaps all that DESTDIR business should only apply to non-Python modules |
comment:13
They are already installed with pip, and regardless I don't think that would particularly help. I think it would be annoying to have some SPKGs that use a different installation method. When I last proposed it, #26018 solved the problem for me. |
Closing as outdated |
And... the race is back.
|
Another one https://github.com/mkoeppe/sage/actions/runs/7911709009/job/21596294450#step:11:8815
|
There seems to be a race when copying files as cp is not atomic. I'm not sure if the copying holds a lock. Either the copying or the
*.pyc
file generation by the Python interpreter in another process conflicted here:See also: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/116280/cannot-create-regular-file-filename-file-exists
CC: @embray
Component: build
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26990
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: