Hi Drew,On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 11:31:01 +0200 Drew Parsons <dpars...@debian.org> wrote:
I've added a virtual python3-nanobind-abiN package, similar to what NumPy does, but with fewer moving parts as unlike NumPy, binary packages depending on python3-nanobind will always need the matching ABI version (otherwise they would not need to expose the dependency in the first place).Upstream are indeed aware of the ABI issue, https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/blob/master/docs/changelog.rstThey do provide an official ABI version. nanobind 2.2.0 bumped up to ABI version 15.
Can you have a look at https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/nanobind and check if this works for you?
They are using semantic versions, so we can expect an ABI bump with every minor release, with Y in version X.Y.Z.The documentation explicitly states that the ABI versioning is not semantic. I decided to extract the latest ABI version from docs/changelog.rst for now, but I'll probably ask upstream for a less brittle mechanism in the long term.
Cheers Timo -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ │ Timo Röhling │ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1 23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │ ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
