On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 02:36:36PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2016/01/10 19:13, Alexandr Shadchin wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 01:26:47PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > I don't think PKG_ARCH=* is a good idea - .pyc files aren't identical > > > between arches. > > > > > > > My little research: > > Python bytecode is portable across platforms, but not really across Python > > versions. > > > > .pyc files contain a timestamp, this explains the difference. > > > > Structure pyc (py2): > > 4 byte - magic > > 4 byte - timestamp > > other - bytecode (marshal) > > > > Structure pyc (py3): > > 4 byte - magic > > 4 byte - timestamp > > 4 byte - size > > other - bytecode (marshal) > > > > I check amd64 and i386, the files are identical. > > > > Can anyone have more information? > > I can't find it now but I'm pretty sure when we looked into this before > we found that there were differences depending on the arch creating the > file, though the generated files could be used on either arch. I'm not > sure if it was due to word length or endianness or something else. > > But given that we already have problems with pyc files with pkg_add -u > I don't want to add any more opportunities for problems. And in any > event doing this on a per-port basis doesn't really make sense.. > > (Specific known problem with pkg_add: some pyc files are generated > with one timestamp, but the py file is actually installed with a > *different* timestamp. This is the cause of the "email/mime" update > problem that people see from time to time.) > > AFAIK the last time anyone used PKG_ARCH=* as an optimization when > building packages was when I last built packages for an arm release. > They're not useful in typical snapshot builds (only if a fast arch > build is done from the same source tree as a slower arch build), > and even for a normal release build they're problematic (there > have been some things marked with PKG_ARCH=* that shouldn't > have been), so at this point I'd lean towards removing PKG_ARCH > support completely.. (If we do that, packages using it, e.g. > much of p5-*, will need bumps). >
Then I also do not see sense in PKG_ARCH=*. Ignore my changes PKG_ARCH=*. Thank you for the detailed answer. -- Alexandr Shadchin
