Skip to content

ci: use pypa/cibuildwheel action directly for riscv64 native runner#482

Merged
maxbachmann merged 1 commit into
rapidfuzz:mainfrom
gounthar:fix/riscv64-cibuildwheel
May 4, 2026
Merged

ci: use pypa/cibuildwheel action directly for riscv64 native runner#482
maxbachmann merged 1 commit into
rapidfuzz:mainfrom
gounthar:fix/riscv64-cibuildwheel

Conversation

@gounthar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gounthar gounthar commented May 4, 2026

The riscv64 build step was using a manual run block to invoke
cibuildwheel via pipx, with a glob to find Python under
/opt/python-3.1*/bin. That broke after the RISE riscv64 runner image
was rebuilt on 2026-04-22. The /opt/python-3.12 paths are gone, the
glob finds nothing, PATH falls back to system Python 3.12, and
pip install pipx hits PEP 668 (Ubuntu 24.04 blocks system-level
installs without --break-system-packages).

The fix: use the pypa/cibuildwheel action directly, same as every
other architecture in this workflow. The action handles Python setup
internally and works fine on ubuntu-24.04-riscv.

I also dropped the if: matrix.archs != 'riscv64' guard on the Build
wheels step. One unified step now covers everything, which avoids the
two paths slowly diverging over time.

Tested on the RISE native riscv64 runner (ubuntu-24.04-riscv):
https://github.com/gounthar/RapidFuzz/actions/runs/25289792932

The previous approach used a custom run step with pipx to invoke
cibuildwheel on the riscv64 native runner. This relied on
/opt/python-3.1*/bin paths that no longer exist after the RISE runner
image rebuild on 2026-04-22.

Using the pypa/cibuildwheel GitHub Action directly handles Python setup
on all platforms including riscv64, removing the need for the special-
cased step.

Signed-off-by: Bruno Verachten <gounthar@gmail.com>
@maxbachmann maxbachmann merged commit bc04118 into rapidfuzz:main May 4, 2026
45 checks passed
@gounthar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gounthar commented May 4, 2026

Thanks for the quick merge!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants