Skip to content
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

py3-bcrypt-3.2: new version stream #47426

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 20, 2025

Conversation

javacruft
Copy link
Member

@javacruft javacruft commented Mar 19, 2025

New version stream of py3-bcrypt to support a pre-Rust backend version for compatibility with Ceph.

Related: #43573

Pre-review Checklist

For new version streams

  • The upstream project actually supports multiple concurrent versions.
  • Any subpackages include the version string in their package name (e.g. name: ${{package.name}}-compat)
  • The package (and subpackages) provides: logical unversioned forms of the package (e.g. nodejs, nodejs-lts)
  • If non-streamed package names no longer built, open PR to withdraw them (see WITHDRAWING PACKAGES)

bcrypt >= 4.0.0 uses a Rust based implementation which is not
yet compatible with the use of this module in Ceph.

Provide bcrypt < 4.0.0 as a version stream to support this
specific use case until the Ceph project updates.

Signed-off-by: James Page <james.page@chainguard.dev>
py3-bcrypt >= 4.0.0 uses a Rust backend integrated with Py03 which
is not compatible with the sub-interpreter usage in the Ceph Manager
module; provide a version channel for the pre-Rust version which is
compatible with this use-case.

Signed-off-by: James Page <james.page@chainguard.dev>
@octo-sts octo-sts bot added the bincapz/pass bincapz/pass Bincapz (aka. malcontent) scan didn't detect any CRITICALs on the scanned packages. label Mar 19, 2025
@javacruft javacruft marked this pull request as draft March 19, 2025 13:00
@javacruft
Copy link
Member Author

Provides are not quite right

Fix provides.

Move top-level test to metapackage.

Signed-off-by: James Page <james.page@chainguard.dev>
@javacruft javacruft marked this pull request as ready for review March 19, 2025 13:14
Copy link
Member

@sil2100 sil2100 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is fine. I was wondering if in provides: we should be doing py3-${{vars.pypi-package}}=${{package.full-version}}, but essentially I don't think it matters?

@javacruft javacruft merged commit 760cd6d into wolfi-dev:main Mar 20, 2025
15 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bincapz/pass bincapz/pass Bincapz (aka. malcontent) scan didn't detect any CRITICALs on the scanned packages.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants