Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
build.snapcraft.io should honour target-architectures when that lands in snapcraft #556
Comments
evandandrea
changed the title from
build.snapcraft.io ignore architectures in yaml
to
build.snapcraft.io ignores "architectures" field in snapcraft.yaml
Apr 21, 2017
ghost
added
the
Status: Proposal
label
Apr 24, 2017
nottrobin
added
the
Status: Triaged
label
Apr 24, 2017
ghost
removed
the
Status: Proposal
label
Apr 25, 2017
flexiondotorg
commented
May 24, 2017
|
I am running into the same issue for a different use case. A snapcraft.yaml that ingests a tarball from CI and said tarball is amd64 only, but there are now builds in the store for armhf and amd64. |
|
Also encountered here |
|
Sadly this isn't what the I agree that we should have the feature of being able to declare what architectures you want the snap to be built for, but it can't be done with the existing |
|
Sorry for the confusion. I just spoke with Sergio and Snapcraft will gain an option for specifying what architectures a snap should be built on: |
evandandrea
changed the title from
build.snapcraft.io ignores "architectures" field in snapcraft.yaml
to
build.snapcraft.io should honour target-architectures when that lands in snapcraft
May 31, 2017
|
Another reason for letting the developer limit the target architectures in the snapcraft.yaml, anbox's build badge shows as "failing" because it's (seemingly) not intended to work on ARM. |
|
@sergiusens, can you estimate when this might land in snapcraft? |
sergiusens
commented
Jun 5, 2017
|
Let me bring the mailing list post into the forums.
…
|
carlaberkers
removed
the
Status: Triaged
label
Jul 3, 2017
elopio
referenced this issue
in ethereum/cpp-ethereum
Nov 3, 2017
Merged
Update the snapcraft metadata #4640
|
For reference, this is the discussion in the forum: |
|
Looks like the current dependency is snapcraft#1681. |
popey commentedMar 28, 2017
My yaml has:-
architectures: [amd64]
Because I know it fails to build on armhf, and I'm only testing on amd64, so pointless wasting cpu cycles on 40 min armhf builds.
I realise build is explicitly limited to amd64 and armhf (and currently not i386), but it would be nice if I could force not to build on armhf for example.