Despite installer's default behaviour to compile and install bytecode,
we are not doing so going forward at stage/package time. [0] During
initial development and qualification of PEP-517 framework support,
compiling and installing bytecode at stage/package time was considered,
but was found problematic, fragile and ultimately unreliable, both
currently and historically (with USE_PYTHON=distutils), due to our
fixed plist requirement. While the living binary distribution format
(wheel) specification [1] says to compile bytecode, that is in the
pure Python package management context (pip, etc); nuance always
exists when interacting with "system" package management.
Additionally, "bytecode is an implementation detail of the CPython
interpreter. No guarantees are made that bytecode will not be added,
removed, or changed between versions of Python," thus "should not
be considered to work across Python VMs or Python releases." [2]
This is important to ensuring correctness for those ports specifying
NO_ARCH.
Instead of compiling and installing bytecode at stage/package time,
there is a WIP, review D34739, that compiles and installs bytecode
at install time instead, using triggers.
The aforementioned build_fs_violations will be investigated.
This reverts commit de6965254c.
With hat: python
Approved by: tcberner (mentor, portmgr)
Reference: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Python/PEP-517 [0]
https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/specifications/binary-distribution-format/ [1]
https://docs.python.org/3/library/dis.html [2]
f5890bd3cb