-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Update commands for scikit-build #66
Comments
C++ devs will want to build C++ only, unless the public API changes. Python devs want to build the Python only, unless the C++ it out of sync somehow. Option 1 deviates from the current behavior, so we should avoid that. |
Yeah, we should add the |
Regarding option 3, the commands that @cwharris posted aren't equivalent to the behavior of I think that's probably fine since the number of devs who need that feature will be very limited, but that's the reason I'm asking this question. |
Yeah I don't think people will need it, and if they do, they can manually invoke |
This is basically all set. Building cugraph inside compose has other issues which I'll address when I can, but other repos are working now. |
With the new scikit-build build systems for RAPIDS Python packages, the default invocation of setup.py will lead to building the C++ library as well as the Python library because the default behavior is to not search for a preexisting C++ library. That gives us a few options for rapids-compose behavior going forward:
-DFIND_$LIB_CPP=ON
on the command line.-DFIND_$LIB_CPP=ON
option as part of thebuild-python
commands.build-*-python
to tell the build to not find a preexisting C++ library, and translate that to the corresponding CMake option under the hood.Of these three options, I'm guessing option 1 is not what most users will expect, and we probably need to add some layer on top of the new build behavior. Between options 2 and 3, it basically boils down to whether compose should be configurable or if we should just tell users who really need to be able to control the build that they should invoke setup.py directly.
Any of these options would be straightforward to implement, I just want to get some feedback on the options before moving forward with any of them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: