Le 10/09/2021 à 17:05, Keith Kraus a écrit :
For what it's worth, setting it to 1 as opposed to 0 will make the package
incompatible with CentOS / RHEL 7 as the glibc they ship does not support
the new ABI.
It is not about the glibc, it's about the stdlibc++.
-Keith
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 4:53 AM Philipp Moritz <pcmor...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah ok, that makes sense! I'm also not even sure if
_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0 was ever mandated on manylinux1, it might
just be a community convention.
I posted
https://discuss.python.org/t/how-to-set-glibcxx-use-cxx11-abi-for-manylinux2014-and-manylinux2010-wheels/10551
,
we can shift the discussion there.
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 1:45 AM Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote:
Le 10/09/2021 à 10:05, Philipp Moritz a écrit :
Thanks for your answer Antoine!
Considering your first comment, there is a section in
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0571 under "Backwards
compatibility
with manylinux1 wheels" that states
"manylinux1 wheels are considered manylinux2010 wheels" and the same
remark
in https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0599/ for manylinux2014 about
compatibility with both manylinux2010 and manylinux1.
As far as I understand, this sentence is talking about system
compatibility: if you can use manylinux2010 wheels on a system, you can
also use manylinux1 wheels. That doesn't necessarily mean a manylinux1
wheel will nicely interoperate with a manylinux2010 wheel that would
expose the same symbols.
It seems wheel-to-wheel interoperability is a grey area of the manylinux
specs. To their credit, though, the issues with C++ symbol / ABI
conflicts are pretty abstruse and almost impossible to predict.
Regards
Antoine.
