Prebuilt bindings for GDAL 3.5

[SwishSwushPow]

Hey 👋

Here is my attempt to provide the prebuilt bindings for GDAL 3.5. I had a look at the previous PR for GDAL 3.4 and I hope I did everything in a similar way 😅

Please let me know if any changes need to be made.

[rmanoka]

This looks great @MrMuetze .

Could you also adjust the CI yml file to use the ubuntu-full-3.5.0 image ( .github/workflows/ci.yml ). We should essentially copy the 3.4 recipe and replace the image and names appropriately. We could remove the CI for the least recent version 3.1.0 instead.

[SwishSwushPow]

I will have a look at this 👍

Edit: I have (hopefully) pushed the changes you mentioned :)

[rmanoka]

Hmm apparently, GDAL now uses versions like: GDAL 3.5.0.2, but our build-script fails to parse it (because the semver crate doesn't seem to support it). See error message copied from the CI:

thread 'main' panicked at 'Could not parse gdal version!: Error("unexpected character '.' after patch version number")', build.rs:27:61

[SwishSwushPow]

Would it be an option to move away from semver and just parse the version bits on our own? Something like this possibly (I just threw this together, I'm not sure if u8 is ideal for version numbers.

use std::str::FromStr;

fn main() {
    let version_string = "3.5.0.2";
    let version_parts: Vec<u8> = version_string
        .split(".")
        .map(u8::from_str)
        .collect::<Result<Vec<_>, _>>()
        .expect("we convert numbers");
    dbg!(version_parts);
    
    // check for major version
    // version_parts[0] < 2
}

https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=a1d8d8b50021881cc4a1704c665144b6

[rmanoka]

Good idea. To make it a bit more comprehensive: running git tag -l on fresh clone of osgeo/gdal suggests we should try to support these strings:

1.1.5
1.1.6
1.1.7
1.1.8
1.1.9
1.10.0
1.10.1
1.11.0
1.11.1
1.11.2
1.11.3
1.11.4
1.11.5
1.2.0
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.3.0
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.4.0
1.4.1
1.4.2
1.4.3
1.4.4
1.4.5
1.5.0
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.5.4
1.6.0
1.6.1
1.6.2
1.6.3
1.7.0
1.7.1
1.7.2
1.7.3
1.8.0
1.8.1
1.9.0
1.9.1
1.9.2
2.0.0
2.0.1
2.0.2
2.0.3
2.1.0
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.2.0
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.3.0
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4.0
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.3RC1
2.4.4
2.4.4RC1
3.0.0
3.0.1
3.0.2
3.0.2RC1
3.0.3
3.0.3RC1
3.0.4
3.0.4RC1
3.1.0
3.1.0RC1
3.1.0RC2
3.1.0RC3
3.1.1
3.1.1RC1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.3RC1
3.1.4
3.1.4RC1
3.1.4RC2
3.2.0
3.2.0RC1
3.2.1
3.2.1RC1
3.2.2
3.2.2.1
3.2.2RC1
3.2.3
3.2.3RC1
3.3.0
3.3.0RC1
3.3.0beta1
3.3.1
3.3.1RC1
3.3.2
3.3.2RC1
3.3.2RC2
3.3.2RC3
3.3.3
3.3.3RC1
3.4.0
3.4.0RC1
3.4.0RC2
3.4.0RC3
3.4.1
3.4.1RC1
3.4.2
3.4.2RC1
3.4.2RC2
3.4.3
3.4.3RC1
3.4.3RC2
3.5.0
3.5.0.1
3.5.0.2
3.5.0RC1
3.5.0RC2
3.5.0RC3
3.5.0RC4

@MrMuetze can you verify your logic can parse all of these? We seem to require a numeric major, minor, patch for the way we version control features.

[SwishSwushPow]

My approach would not be able to support this kind of prerelease string (for betas or release candidates), but I don't think the semver crate did that either. 🤔 I did a quick check right now and semver would expect something like this: 3.5.0-RC0. It fails with 3.5.0RC0. (Error("unexpected character 'R' after patch version number"))

Do you think we need to be able to parse beta or release candidate versions? If not, my approach would be sufficient and I could incorporate the changes. If not, we have to figure out something else.

Edit: But all the numeric versions should be supported. 👍

[rmanoka]

Makes sense @MrMuetze ; I'm just seeing we can ensure better robustness. I looked into the osgeo gdal source code. Most apps in the repo seem to use GDAL_VERSION_NUM which is a numeric format of the version. It is computed as follows:

/* GDAL_COMPUTE_VERSION macro introduced in GDAL 1.10 */
/* Must be used ONLY to compare with version numbers for GDAL >= 1.10 */
#ifndef GDAL_COMPUTE_VERSION
#define GDAL_COMPUTE_VERSION(maj,min,rev) ((maj)*1000000+(min)*10000+(rev)*100)
#endif

/* Note: the formula to compute GDAL_VERSION_NUM has changed in GDAL 1.10 */
#ifndef GDAL_VERSION_NUM
#  define GDAL_VERSION_NUM      (GDAL_COMPUTE_VERSION(GDAL_VERSION_MAJOR,GDAL_VERSION_MINOR,GDAL_VERSION_REV)+GDAL_VERSION_BUILD)
#endif

The formula seems to be the same since at least 2.0.0, and the value is available as a string from the API by calling gdal_version_info("VERSION_NUM") in build.rs. I think this would be a better approach. Any thoughts @michaelkirk @lnicola @jdroenner ?

[SwishSwushPow]

Yes if we can get something semver compatible from GDAL that would be the way to go! 👍

[rmanoka]

@MrMuetze let's go ahead the VERSION_NUM approach. Could you modify gdal/build.rs to use this approach?

[SwishSwushPow]

I can give it a go 👍

Edit: Not sure if my dissection of the version string is the cleanest, but it should work 😅

[rmanoka]

Thanks @MrMuetze !

bors r+

[bors]

Build succeeded:

• ci ubuntu-lts
• ci ubuntu-lts (--all-features)
• clippy