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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix SUBTOOLCHAINS spec for intel-para toolchain #2585

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 21, 2018
Merged

fix SUBTOOLCHAINS spec for intel-para toolchain #2585

merged 1 commit into from Sep 21, 2018

Conversation

ocaisa
Copy link
Member

@ocaisa ocaisa commented Sep 21, 2018 •
edited by boegel

slipped through the cracks in #2466

@ocaisa ocaisa changed the base branch from master to develop September 21, 2018 13:08
@ocaisa ocaisa added the bug fix label Sep 21, 2018
@boegel boegel added this to the 3.7.0 milestone Sep 21, 2018
boegel
boegel approved these changes Sep 21, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@boegel boegel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As far as I can see this is the only place where the .NAME was accidentally omitted...

Nice catch @ocaisa!

@boegel boegel changed the title Slipped through the cracks... fix SUBTOOLCHAINS spec for intel-para toolchain Sep 21, 2018
@boegel boegel merged commit a88955f into easybuilders:develop Sep 21, 2018
@boegel boegel mentioned this pull request Sep 21, 2018
Merged
@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor

ah yes, what was I thinking then, thanks for spotting it.

@ocaisa ocaisa deleted the cracks branch September 26, 2018 11:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@boegel boegel boegel approved these changes

@bartoldeman bartoldeman Awaiting requested review from bartoldeman

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug fix
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.7.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@ocaisa @bartoldeman @boegel