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
only restore $PYTHONPATH if it was defined #743
Conversation
Easyblocks unit test suite PASSed (see https://jenkins1.ugent.be/job/easybuild-easyblocks-pr-builder/1364/console for more details). This pull request is now ready for review/testing. Please try and find someone who can tackle this; contact @boegel if you're not sure what to do. |
Easyblocks unit test suite PASSed (see https://jenkins1.ugent.be/job/easybuild-easyblocks-pr-builder/1365/console for more details). This pull request is now ready for review/testing. Please try and find someone who can tackle this; contact @boegel if you're not sure what to do. |
can we have a test for this? |
We don't have runtime tests for easyblocks in the unit tests. This type of thing can really only be tested by doing a full build, which is done during regression testing. However, there's something going on here that I don't fully understand. Although the fix is needed, someone (see EB ML) ran into this while |
wouldn't it not make sense to have some unittests for the generic EasyBlocks? |
@JensTimmerman: you mean like, creating small toy programs that are built using the generic easyblocks? it can get tricky expensive, for example if CMake is involved, or for OCamlPackage, etc... We should do proper testing with the actual applications instead when updating easyblocks (which I typically do when an existing easyblock is touched). |
@wpoely86: please review? |
looks good |
Thanks @wpoely86! |
only restore $PYTHONPATH if it was defined
No description provided.