-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.7k
Naming convention for aarch64 binary distribution is unique #4282
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
Comments
just FTR, the I think originally the weird naming stems from the fact that maven artifacts (see https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.google.protobuf/protoc/3.17.3) are used as part of the protobuf's release process. (note that I'm not arguing the the current way of naming the binaries is correct, I'm just explaining the background of the problem). |
@jtattermusch, would it still be possible to add the Especially with ARM gaining a lot of attention with the M1 Macs, this would be very beneficial. |
The Java release in Maven Central needs aarch_64. It is used by Maven and Gradle plugins and follows the cross-architecture consistent naming used by os-maven-plugin. But that has no impact on the names used for the downloads on the release page. I'd agree that mirroring Note that last I saw there isn't actually any aarch64 protoc binary available at the moment. It is actually just an x86_64 binary renamed to help tooling. See #8557 |
As stated, this is to stay consistent with the hard requirements for Maven Central. So unfortunately we won't be able to change the name. |
I think the OP was suggesting that this be added, even just as a link. Without this, every download needs to go through an odd Is there a good reason not to have links for both aarch64 and aarch_64 both point to the same release artifacts? Same question for riscv64, etc.? |
The current release distributes a binary for aarch64 (arm64) named
https://github.com/google/protobuf/releases/download/v3.5.1/protoc-3.5.1-linux-aarch_64.zip
The use of the string 'aarch_64' is unusual, since
uname -m
on a real aarch64 machine returns thisIn particular this affects me at
linkerd
atlinkerd/linkerd#1695
where the line in their file at
https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd/blob/cbef41b40ff5de41f9fa41615f7f1b363eae2ead/protoc#L14
that bootstraps protoc will not pick up the right image without some architecture-special tweaking that I want to avoid.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: