lang/python310: Introduce DTRACE option

[0mp]

Summary

lang/python310: Introduce DTRACE option

- Let users compile Python with DTrace support. The option is off by
  default for now.

- Set USES=gmake. It turns out that the Python makefiles contain syntax
  specific to GNU make, which is interpreted by bmake in an unexptected way (in
  particular, $< is not expanded as desired). In order to fix that, let's just
  use GNU make for now.

- Patch the configure script in order to force building of the object files
  required for DTrace support. Here's the problem with the detection mechanism:

  $ dtrace -G -s ./conftest.d -xnolibs -o /tmp/conftest.o
  ld: error: /usr/lib/dtrace/drti.o is incompatible with /tmp/conftest.o.0DHcqI
  dtrace: failed to link script ./conftest.d: failed to link /tmp/conftest.o: ld exited with status 1


Related Issues

  - https://bugs.python.org/issue29077

Reviewed_by:
Approved by:
Differential_Revision: D31489

Test Plan

• The port builds fine in poudriere.
• dtrace -ln 'python*:::' shows some available probes when python3.10 is executing.

[koobs]

lang/python310/Makefile

18

Mmm, surprised by this. CPython I don't believe has ever required or had GNU make specific features. Can you identify the introduction of this? Can we fix this with a patch for portability, such that we can submit it upstream? Not upstreamed local changes has been a source of many issues for us in the distant past that we have only recently come out of

74

Empty line before this. Was DTRACE_WITH=dtrace tested? Did it work, not work? WITH|ENABLE are preferred over ON (particularly without an OFF), as it can cause issues with systems detecting features and building with them, even when the OPTION has been disabled

lang/python310/files/patch-configure

7

Is removing the test the correct/complete resolution for upstream, or does this need a freebsd specific call, or a !freebsd specific condition?

[0mp]

lang/python310/Makefile

18

It's a tricky one. bmake seems to misunderstand the desired meaning of $< in the Python makefiles. GNU make does the right thing. In a way, we could fix it but the problem is that you'll never be sure if you actually fixed all the issues.

I can prepare a patch that could be submitted upstream, but from my limited perspective it seems to be an unnecessary uphill battle. But then, I'm not a Python maintainer and you surely understand the dynamics better.

74

I didn't add a newline here, because DEBUG was already in one block with IPV6. I'll add a newline. Should I add one after as well?

Also, WITH should work. I'll give it a try.

lang/python310/files/patch-configure

7

The removal works for FreeBSD. If we want to upstream the patch, we must fix the test instead.

From what I understand, the whole point of this test is to check if the dtrace binary supports -G. I'm not sure why the current test is failing to do the right thing on FreeBSD. I'm also not sure what an elegant fix would be.

[koobs]

Forgot one other thing in previous review. dtrace has been an option in Python for a (long) while, and we would want to add this option across all relevent Python ports

lang/python310/Makefile

18

Not to say this isn't a gmake'ism, or not an issue, but we would expect other failures of this kind across the board and in the past due to this issue, and I can't recall any of the same kind (I may be wrong, or forgetting).

Could of additional things for this issue:

• If gmake is (currently) needed, we should do it across the board for all ports, unless this is a (recent) version+ specific issue (need confirmation).
• Was there an actual failure/impact due to the mentioned syntax when not using gmake? Is it scoped to a/the dtrace option?
• What might a patch to this look like, to obviate the need to switch to gmake completely, that we may be able to send up stream. Upstream is very approachable and we have a good relationship

74

Unless you'd like to isolate that (non functional, logically different) changeset into a separate one, which would be preferable, particularly if it affects all/other python port versions. If so, feel free to not worry about it here.

lang/python310/files/patch-configure

7

I see an identical error in pkg-fallout (13arm64)

https://www.mail-archive.com/[e-mail]/msg1771010.html

What was the version/arch you saw this linker error on?

Can you see if/where else this fails in the same way for {11,12,13,i386,amd64} at least

[kamil_anserinae.net]

lang/python310/files/patch-configure

7

We stop getting the dtro test error if you make the dtrace call with -64 or -32 flags (it doesn't matter which). Happily this solution also works on linux, so there is a high chance of it being accepted by upstream.

I am happy to make an upstream contribution so that the fix flows in organically, stay tuned.