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

build: fix python insanity #2407

merged 1 commit into from Sep 28, 2019


Copy link

commented Sep 28, 2019

I keep annoyingly hitting the python sanity check at build time.

Reduce the chance of hitting this build-time error by removing $(pwd)/src/cmd from PATH for the duration of the PYTHON configure checks, so that the path the in-tree python wrapper script is less likely to be found.

Problem: If configure is run under an in-tree Flux instance, then
AM_PATH_PYTHON will pick up src/cmd/python, which will result in
triggering the python sanity check and cause a build failure.

Avoid picking up src/cmd/python by removing it from PATH for the
duration of the python checks.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 28, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #2407 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2407      +/-   ##
- Coverage   81.07%   81.07%   -0.01%     
  Files         224      224              
  Lines       35770    35770              
- Hits        29002    29001       -1     
- Misses       6768     6769       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/common/libflux/mrpc.c 87.79% <0%> (-1.19%) ⬇️
src/common/libsubprocess/local.c 79.86% <0%> (-0.35%) ⬇️
src/shell/shell.c 85.71% <0%> (-0.27%) ⬇️
src/cmd/flux-job.c 85.32% <0%> (+0.28%) ⬆️
src/common/libutil/aux.c 94.44% <0%> (+3.7%) ⬆️

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Sep 28, 2019

Nice! I verified this has the intended effect (although the title of this PR left me hoping for more :-)

@garlick garlick merged commit fc88c25 into flux-framework:master Sep 28, 2019
4 checks passed
4 checks passed
Summary 1 potential rule
codecov/patch Coverage not affected when comparing da2469e...be6fe6c
codecov/project 81.07% (-0.01%) compared to da2469e
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
@garlick garlick referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.