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

Check system requirements if the package is in the local cache #3616

wants to merge 1 commit into from


Copy link

@lasote lasote commented Sep 25, 2018

Closes #2262

Changelog: Bugfix: Check if the system_requirements() have to be executed even when the package is retrieved from the local cache.

@lasote lasote added this to the 1.8 milestone Sep 25, 2018
@ghost ghost assigned lasote Sep 25, 2018
@ghost ghost added the stage: review label Sep 25, 2018
@danimtb danimtb assigned memsharded and unassigned lasote Sep 27, 2018
@@ -319,6 +319,8 @@ def _handle_node_cache(self, node, package_id, keep_build, processed_package_ref
elif node.binary == BINARY_CACHE:
output.success('Already installed!')
_handle_system_requirements(conan_file, package_ref, self._client_cache,
Copy link

@memsharded memsharded Oct 1, 2018

This shouldn't be done here. System requirements are installed:

  • On download of packages
  • On build

Sucessive installations shouldn't install them again, and it can make installing the deps graph very slow for already cached deps.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@lasote lasote Oct 1, 2018

Well, it won't install them again if the system reqs folder is already there. But it nicely covers the case where the user wants to force the install by removing the folder.

Copy link

@memsharded memsharded Oct 1, 2018

It seems a very corner case for me, to cover the case where someone enters the conan cache and removes there manually some folder. The problem I see is that this could increase an order of magnitude the otherwise no-op "conan install" command when the dependencies are already installed in the cache.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@lasote lasote Oct 1, 2018

I could agree with that. If it causes some minimal issue then we should avoid it. Then we should go to the issue, to comment that this is not a valid possibility and close it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants