-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
slim images are incompatible with manylinux2010+ #989
Comments
|
I think you're incorrect / misguided with that -- if the soname is in the list for auditwheel then it is expected to be available on manylinux-compatible distributions but if this is the stance then the images should at least mark that they are incompatible with manylinux such that they don't install incompatible distributions by default. one can do that by providing a breaking manylinux compatibility is a really bad look for the official images |
@asottile-sentry requiring to install a dependency doesn't really make it incompatible. Slim images are for developer who want more control over what is in their image so they only install what is necessary. |
that's not really the intention of the manylinux policy |
I don't see |
that policy link is for manylinux1 (very old) -- the policies are now handled via auditwheel as of PEP 600 |
From PEP 0513
Nothing in the PEPs require that the system packages are installed to be manylinux compatible, just that the pip installed packages can link against them. The point of manylinux is that the creators of pip-installable packages create packages that work on many Linux distributions, not that a From the current policy: |
of course nothing requires one to be compatible -- but you previously were and are now not and your users are feeling the pain of that decision. the goal is to make a |
The The non-slim images (like I'd still argue that both regular and slim images are manylinux-compatible, since any extra user-required system libraries are available for installation and at compatible versions. If I were to take a minimal Debian host (like a the |
? $ docker run --rm -ti debian:bookworm bash -xc 'apt update -qq && apt install -y -qq --no-install-recommends python3-pip >& /dev/null && ls /lib/*/libexpat*'
+ apt update -qq
All packages are up to date.
+ apt install -y -qq --no-install-recommends python3-pip
+ ls /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpat.so.1 /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpat.so.1.8.10 /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpatw.so.1 /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpatw.so.1.8.10
/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpat.so.1
/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpat.so.1.8.10
/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpatw.so.1
/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libexpatw.so.1.8.10 |
Sure, it has the specific library that is disrupting your workflow today, but not every library in the
|
notably they are missing
libexpat.so.1
which is required by auditwheelsome example breakage:
#984 has some related discussion
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: