release python binaries for ppc64le in python-version repo

[adilhusain-s]

Hi there,
I'm trying to use actions/setup-python action on self-hosted ppc64le github runner. (ppc64le arch)
the action fails to install the python binary as there is no python binary available in actions/python-version repo.
could we release the binary for ppc64le arch as well?
why are we building the binaries in the first place?

does anyone know how self-hosted arm github runner install the python binary?
even, there are no binaries for arm arch.

hoping for your response.

[e-korolevskii]

Hello @adilhusain-s!
We will investigate the issue and get back to you as soon as we have updates.

[dmitry-shibanov]

Hello @adilhusain-s. Thank you for your report. For now the action does not provide python binaries for ppc64le. I'm going to change the label from bug to the feature request.

[adilhusain-s]

@dmitry-shibanov
@e-korolevskii
could you please answer this?
"why are we building the binaries in the first place?"
can't we just used the official python binaries from python.org?

[e-korolevskii]

Hello @adilhusain-s

The reason why we build the Python binaries in the setup-python action on GitHub instead of using the official Python binaries from python.org is to provide a consistent and reproducible environment for GitHub Actions workflows.

When using the official Python binaries, the version and build of Python that are installed on a machine can vary depending on the operating system, architecture, and other factors. This can lead to inconsistencies in behavior and make it difficult to debug issues that may arise in a workflow.

To address this, the setup-python action builds the Python binaries from source, using a known set of build tools and dependencies. This ensures that the resulting binaries are consistent across all platforms and can be relied upon to behave the same way in any workflow.

Furthermore, the setup-python action allows users to easily install and use different versions of Python in their workflows, without having to manually download and install the binaries themselves. This saves time and effort for users and makes it easier to maintain and update workflows over time.

[shahidhs-ibm]

@e-korolevskii Thank you for your response.

Based on the conversation in other PRs/ issues, we can think of following ways to add ppc64le support:

1. As per comment, we can try using cross-compilation to build and release Python binary tarball with ppc64le arch support in actions/python-versions. Later we can work on setting up ways to test the binary on ppc64le native host.
2. We can try installing Python for non-Intel archs in similar way to https://github.com/deadsnakes/action. We tried it in this way and its working fine for us for ppc64le.

Kindly suggest.

[janani66]

Appreciate feedback on this feature request to add the python binaries for ppc64le .

[aparnajyothi-y]

Hello @adilhusain-s,
Thank you for your feature request regarding the release of Python binaries for the ppc64le architecture in the python-versions repository. We appreciate your input and the thoughtful rationale you've shared for expanding platform support.

At this time, we are not planning to add support for ppc64le. You can refer to the list of supported architectures in the setup-python documentation.

We understand that this capability could be beneficial for specific use cases, especially in environments leveraging self-hosted ppc64le runners. Your feedback is valuable, and we encourage you to continue sharing insights that can help shape future enhancements.
Please feel free to reach out if you have any further thoughts or concerns!