> On Mar 15, 2017, at 5:59 PM, Nathaniel Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Breno Leitao <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Stefan, >> >> On 03/11/2017 01:46 AM, Stefan van der Walt wrote: >>> I guess my question was whether the re-usage of manylinux0 is correct. I >>> would guess not, if the other PPC build system has different dependencies. >> >> Right, What would you suggest? What about manylinux2? >> >> Since manylinux0 is CentOS 5, manylinux 1 is CentOS 6, and manylinux2 is >> CentOS 7 > > You've got an off-by-one error :-). manylinux1 is CentOS 5. > > I'm a little nervous about predicting what manylinux3 will be when we > haven't even defined manylinux2, but OTOH I guess there isn't really > any good reason *not* to define manylinux3 right now -- CentOS 7 isn't > going anywhere, and if something major changes between now and CentOS > 6's EOL that makes some other system more attractive as a base than > CentOS 7, we can always make that manylinux4. >
Is there much reason not to jump straight to CentOS7 for manylinux2? We still have manylinux1 for old and busted distro’s yes? — Donald Stufft
_______________________________________________ Wheel-builders mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/wheel-builders
