Skip to content
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

toolchain resolution should take into account no-remote tags. #9996

Closed
cphang99 opened this issue Oct 11, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

toolchain resolution should take into account no-remote tags. #9996

cphang99 opened this issue Oct 11, 2019 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) team-Configurability Issues for Configurability team type: feature request

Comments

@cphang99
Copy link

Description of the problem / feature request:

This affects cross-platform builds (e.g. host is windows, remote-workers are linux) involving remote-execution that utilise platforms and toolchains.

If a test target is tagged as no-remote or no-remote-exec, toolchain resolution does not take this into account and determine that the execution constraints should be modified to be that of the host platform. If this is not done, a different toolchain can be selected that is incompatible and causes builds to fail.

In the case of cross-platform builds, a workaround is to manually set the execution constraints in the test target with exec_compatible_with to that of the host platform. Ideally however, this should be automatically detected during toolchain resolution.

What operating system are you running Bazel on?

macOS

What's the output of bazel info release?

0.29.1

@jin jin added team-Remote-Exec Issues and PRs for the Execution (Remote) team untriaged labels Oct 14, 2019
@buchgr buchgr added team-Configurability Issues for Configurability team and removed team-Remote-Exec Issues and PRs for the Execution (Remote) team labels Oct 28, 2019
@aragos
Copy link
Contributor

aragos commented Oct 30, 2019

This seems closely related to this design discussion regarding unifying strategies and execution platforms.

@katre katre added P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) type: feature request and removed untriaged labels Nov 8, 2019
@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented Nov 8, 2019

@aragos, this sounds like something that should be handled by your latest project.

@meisterT meisterT added untriaged and removed P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) labels May 12, 2020
@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented May 15, 2020

This is now my project.

@katre katre self-assigned this May 15, 2020
@katre katre added P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) and removed untriaged labels May 15, 2020
@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented Aug 10, 2020

Closing this in favor of the canonical tracking issue for execution platforms and strategies, #11432.

@katre katre closed this as completed Aug 10, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) team-Configurability Issues for Configurability team type: feature request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants