Opened 3 years ago
Closed 22 months ago
#64063 closed defect (fixed)
pandoc is not available for arm64
Reported by: | ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt) | Owned by: | judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev) |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | ports | Version: | 2.7.1 |
Keywords: | arm64 | Cc: | mascguy (Christopher Nielsen), essandess (Steve Smith) |
Port: | pandoc |
Description
pandoc is only available for x86_64, which means any ports depending on it cannot build on arm64.
Error: Cannot install notcurses for the arch 'arm64' because Error: its dependency pandoc only supports the arch 'x86_64'. Error: mportdepends notcurses activate failed. Calculating dependencies for 'notcurses' failed, aborting. ./mpbb/mpbb: error: `install-dependencies' failed to run successfully
Change History (39)
comment:1 Changed 3 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
I see the description, but there is no pandoc library with separate command-line tool any more at least.
Just one (behemoth) binary, and a bunch of docs.
comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
pandoc
cannot be built for arm64 due to the stack. In most cases, pandoc
is not a mandatory dependency for building documentation. In such cases, I recommend using go-md2man
, lowndown
, or rb30-ronn-ng
.
Sometimes projects in Markdown files use specific features of pandoc
(which is not very cool), so it is a good idea to check that the documentation is displayed correctly before replacing the dependency.
comment:4 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
pandoc (x86_64) will work fine on arm64, though, so it would seem there is no need to start the project of looking for workarounds and testing them all out.
Someone just needs to sort out (again) how to get that x86_64 pandoc to automatically install onto the arm64 system.
A year ago, I just set pandoc up to install the x86_64 binary on arm64. That solved this problem for a few months, and everything was building, until that workaround was removed -- we've been broken on arm64 since then.
The proper fix should be to induce MacPorts to install the x86_64 binary by itself.
It may be adding installs_libs no
to the pandoc Portfile is all that is needed now, as above.
comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by mascguy (Christopher Nielsen)
Cc: | mascguy added |
---|
comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by Vadim-Valdis Yudaev <judaew@…>
comment:7 follow-up: 8 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
Replying to kencu:
... It may be adding
installs_libs no
to the pandoc Portfile is all that is needed now, as above.
pandoc
still needs to be built, and it requires a stack to build, which is not available for arm64. So I don't think it will work.
comment:8 Changed 3 years ago by reneeotten (Renee Otten)
Replying to judaew:
pandoc
still needs to be built, and it requires a stack to build, which is not available for arm64. So I don't think it will work.
I guess Ken is referring to this commit where a binary is used for systems that cannot build pandoc
for reasons mentioned above. In that case no building is required…
comment:9 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
macports is supposed to see that an x86_64 binary of pandoc is available and install it on arm64.
if that can be made to work, great.
otherwise the fudge I did last year that Renee pointed to is a very trivial fix until ghc/stack etc can be made to work on arm.
comment:10 follow-ups: 11 22 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
homebrew has an arm64-native pandoc built using this:
https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/7433#issuecomment-858590474
they don't use stack to build it
comment:11 follow-up: 23 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
Replying to kencu:
homebrew has an arm64-native pandoc built using this:
https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/7433#issuecomment-858590474
they don't use stack to build it
Currently, cabal in MacPorts does not support arm64 either, although the project itself has a prebuilt version and can be built under arm64. cabal requires ghc as build and run dependency.
cabal: The program 'ghc' version >=7.0.1 is required but it could not be found.
I think for a start we should add ghc-bootstrap for arm64 architecture, with which we can build dependencies for ghc (maybe alex, happy, hscolour) and build ghc itself directly.
This is a lot of work that someone will have to do one day.
comment:12 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
Cc: | essandess added |
---|
comment:13 follow-up: 14 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
In the next PR I add binary pandoc x86_64 for arm64. But I cannot verify that these changes work for arm64:
comment:14 follow-up: 16 Changed 3 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Replying to kencu:
macports is supposed to see that an x86_64 binary of pandoc is available and install it on arm64.
I believe that works fine if the port that isn't arm64 compatible is the one you asked to install, but I believe it doesn't work if the port that isn't arm64 compatible is a dependency of the one you asked to install. See #63092.
Replying to judaew:
In the next PR I add binary pandoc x86_64 for arm64.
That does not seem like the correct solution. You should not need to lie to MacPorts about what arch you're installing.
comment:15 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
Ryan, what is the best way to proceed in this case?
comment:16 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
Replying to ryandesign:
Replying to kencu:
macports is supposed to see that an x86_64 binary of pandoc is available and install it on arm64.
I believe that works fine if the port that isn't arm64 compatible is the one you asked to install, but I believe it doesn't work if the port that isn't arm64 compatible is a dependency of the one you asked to install. See #63092.
Josh suggests the standard fixes be tried: either put installs_libs no
in the pandoc Portfile (best, if pandoc doesn't install any libs, which it doesn't, despite what the pandoc description says) or alternatively putting depends_skip_archcheck pandoc
in everything that calls for pandoc.
I suppose we might get someone to try those, and see if it works.
I don't have an arm system, so I can't.
comment:17 follow-up: 20 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
What does installs_libs
do? Does this apply to libraries in ${prefix}/lib?
comment:18 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
It is supposed to tell macports that the dependent port does not have to match the architecture of the port you are trying to build.
Because no libraries are installed, there is nothing to link against.
So MacPorts can feel free to install a working binary of a different architecture if it is available (eg an x86_64 pandoc on an arm64 system that can run it).
Ideally, this will "just work". Perhaps it does -- I can't test it at present.
comment:19 Changed 3 years ago by Vadim-Valdis Yudaev <judaew@…>
comment:20 Changed 3 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
Replying to judaew:
What does
installs_libs
do? Does this apply to libraries in ${prefix}/lib?
From man portfile
:
installs_libs By default, it is assumed that ports may install libraries or headers that can be incorporated into their dependents. If this is not the case, set installs_libs to no. This means that this port's depen- dents need not check that it is installed for the same architectures as them; that it is permissible to distribute binaries of the depen- dents even if their licenses conflict with the license of this port; and that updates to this port can never result in broken dynamic linking in its dependents. Type: optional Default: none Example: installs_libs no
comment:21 follow-up: 26 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
There should be no issue either installing the x86_64
pandoc
binary on arm64
, or building the same x86_64
pandoc
binary on arm64
using either stack
or cabal
. I have done all of these.
However, I have observed many MacPorts fragilities on an M1 box recognizing that it should be able to do these things. See, e.g. https://trac.macports.org/ticket/63943#comment:6
My belief is that these are issues with MacPorts, not the port pandoc
itself or other ports, and that workarounds like https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/13165 just hide the underlying issue, whatever it is.
comment:22 follow-up: 24 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to kencu:
homebrew has an arm64-native pandoc built using this:
https://github.com/haskell/cabal/issues/7433#issuecomment-858590474
they don't use stack to build it
That’s just using an x86_64
binary (cabal
) to build another x86_64
binary (pandoc
), all running on arm64
. Native M1 stack
or cabal
binaries or builds do not exist.
comment:23 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to judaew:
I think for a start we should add ghc-bootstrap for arm64 architecture, with which we can build dependencies for ghc (maybe alex, happy, hscolour) and build ghc itself directly.
See https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/12730. There’s a native ghc
for arm64
available right now, but bootstrapping is broken, so we’re waiting until upstream fixes it before we merge.
Theoretically, one could use the existing x64_64
cabal
or stack
with this arm64
ghc
to build native binaries on the M1, but I’d recommend just waiting until these upstreams migrate to their own native builds and just use the x86_64
binaries on M1 in the meantime.
comment:24 follow-up: 25 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
comment:25 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to kencu:
Replying to essandess:
Replying to kencu: That’s just using an
x86_64
binary (cabal
)Nope, it is 100% arm64:
% file cabal cabal: Mach-O 64-bit executable arm64
For some reason, the Homebrew cabal
maintainer recently moved to the experimental tree that has a native arm64
cabal
binary. But that binary still uses ghc
version 8.10.7 (https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/cabal-install#default), which is itself x86_64
and can only compile x86_64
things. Native arm64
ghc
version 9.2.1 that can build native arm64
binaries just came out weeks ago.
Furthermore, Homebrew doesn’t bootstrap any of this stuff (neither cabal
nor ghc
nor stack
) and simply relies on binary downloads. MacPorts already provides that basic option with the --prebuilt
variant.
Again, I’d recommend just waiting until these upstreams migrate to their own native builds and just use the x86_64
binaries on M1 in the meantime.
comment:26 follow-up: 27 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
In my view, this question about the fragility of recognizing the ability to install x86_64
binaries on M1 is the salient issue. What is breaking this?
There should be no issue either installing the
x86_64
pandoc
binary onarm64
, or building the samex86_64
pandoc
binary onarm64
using eitherstack
orcabal
. I have done all of these.However, I have observed many MacPorts fragilities on an M1 box recognizing that it should be able to do these things. See, e.g. https://trac.macports.org/ticket/63943#comment:6
My belief is that these are issues with MacPorts, not the port
pandoc
itself or other ports, and that workarounds like https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/13165 just hide the underlying issue, whatever it is.
comment:27 Changed 3 years ago by judaew (Vadym-Valdis Yudaiev)
Replying to essandess:
In my view, this question about the fragility of recognizing the ability to install
x86_64
binaries on M1 is the salient issue. What is breaking this?
Herby Gillot has verified that installs_libs no
build the x86_64
pandoc
for arm64
correctly. I think this fix is enough for now until we have ghc
for arm64
.
Replying to herbygillot:
So I'm actually on an Apple Silicon machine at the moment, running macOS 12 (Monterey).
I synced my ports tree after this change, and installed
pandoc
, and it actually installedstack
, and builtpandoc
from source without issue 🤷🏾♂️ Or at least I'm pretty sure that's what I saw.I do see that my
pandoc
executable is anx86_64
one instead ofarm64
:➜ ~ file `which pandoc` /opt/local/bin/pandoc: Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64
comment:28 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
what you want to see is whether pandoc x86_64 gets automatically pulled in as a dep when building an arm64 port.
that is what was not working.
still not sure if it works. Can anyone confirm/test?
comment:29 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
Steve, it looks to me that homebrew is using an arm64 ghc to bootstrap it's build of an arm64 ghc.
I think you are incorrect in your assertions.
see:
https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/HEAD/Formula/ghc.rb
comment:30 follow-up: 31 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
ie they build an arm64 ghc, bootstrapping with this:
https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/8.10.7/ghc-8.10.7-aarch64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
comment:31 follow-up: 33 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to kencu:
ie they build an arm64 ghc, bootstrapping with this:
https://downloads.haskell.org/ghc/8.10.7/ghc-8.10.7-aarch64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
I am out of date! Thanks for correcting me.
These issues may have a longer tail for us because we use stack
for nearly all our builds, and stack
is stable and reliable because it specifies and downloads a bunch of pre-determined LTS versions of ghc
and Haskell libraries. I haven’t dug into the guts of stack
recently but I’d be amazed if it’s downloading arm 64
versions of ghc
.
comment:32 follow-up: 34 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
we could just do a quickie switch to building pandoc etc with cabal-install.
That is what I use to build pandoc, shellcheck, etc on 10.6 SnowLeopard, where stack is useless for me.
It might be a long time before stack catches up to support arm64.
comment:33 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to essandess:
I haven’t dug into the guts of
stack
recently but I’d be amazed if it’s downloadingarm64
versions ofghc
.
It is not: https://github.com/commercialhaskell/stackage-content/blob/master/stack/stack-setup-2.yaml
comment:34 Changed 3 years ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Replying to kencu:
we could just do a quickie switch to building pandoc etc with cabal-install.
That is what I use to build pandoc, shellcheck, etc on 10.6 SnowLeopard, where stack is useless for me.
It might be a long time before stack catches up to support arm64.
There’s a haskell_cabal
PG for that—I’ve used it myself. I’d suggest adding that as legacy support to the existing Portfiles if it’s necessary.
But I’m not eager to complicate Haskell world builds in general, which are finicky enough without trying to manage migration issues too.
I think we should focus on fixing our stuff and let Haskell world work out how to handle migration.
Non-native pandoc
builds and runs right now on an M1. What is causing these install issues?
comment:35 Changed 3 years ago by kencu (Ken)
Re the install issues:
For all we know they have been fixed. Somebody just needs to test if the fix has worked or not -- it may work now.
comment:36 Changed 23 months ago by kencu (Ken)
Just to follow-up here, we still have no arm version of pandoc, but the install issues appear to have been set right, and a pandoc x86_64 binary is transparently installed on an M1 Mac, built by using an x86_64 version of stack at present.
% uname -a Darwin Kens-MBP 22.2.0 Darwin Kernel Version 22.2.0: Fri Nov 11 02:03:51 PST 2022; root:xnu-8792.61.2~4/RELEASE_ARM64_T6000 arm64 % port -v installed stack The following ports are currently installed: stack @2.9.1_0 (active) requested_variants='' platform='darwin 22' archs='x86_64' date='2022-12-30T14:11:58-0800' % port -v installed pandoc The following ports are currently installed: pandoc @2.19.2_0 (active) requested_variants='' platform='darwin 22' archs='x86_64' date='2022-12-30T14:12:55-0800'
comment:37 Changed 23 months ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
I’ll go back and check if pandoc
builds under the latest cabal
/ghc
. If so, we get arm64
.
comment:38 Changed 23 months ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
comment:39 Changed 22 months ago by essandess (Steve Smith)
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | assigned → closed |
Everything that uses
stack
is in the same position. It looks like a lot of the dependents are just running thepandoc
executable, and so could usedepends_skip_archcheck
. Pandoc's description says it is also a haskell library, so settinginstalls_libs no
probably isn't appropriate?