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

Add FreeBSD testing in Github Actions (fix #389) #419

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Jan 24, 2022

Conversation

r-darwish
Copy link
Contributor

@r-darwish r-darwish commented Jan 17, 2022

Fix #389

@nshalman
Copy link
Contributor

nshalman commented Jan 17, 2022

Thank you!!
It looks like that test took about 5 minutes to run. My only question is whether we want that on every push or if we want to just give maintainers the option to run them manually.
Either way, this is fantastic to have and I look forward to some version of it landing soon!

@r-darwish
Copy link
Contributor Author

r-darwish commented Jan 17, 2022

Yeah, the reason for being slow is that it downloads a full VM image, extract it and boots it up before doing anything. I think 5 minutes are bearable, though

@nshalman
Copy link
Contributor

nshalman commented Jan 19, 2022

I wonder if there's a clever way to make it somehow depend on the cross-compilation target so that if it wouldn't build we won't waste time spinning up the VM for testing... EDIT: Or really just any/all of the compilation targets. If any compilation target is broken, that's reason enough to skip the expensive VM test.

Perhaps:

needs: build

Reference https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58457140/dependencies-between-workflows-on-github-actions

@nathany
Copy link
Contributor

nathany commented Jan 19, 2022

Well, if we do needs: build, it will run sequentially instead of in parallel...

@nshalman
Copy link
Contributor

nshalman commented Jan 19, 2022

The builds are very fast. I see the argument on the other side though.

@nathany
Copy link
Contributor

nathany commented Jan 19, 2022

That the VM build starts later? Maybe more waiting

@nathany
Copy link
Contributor

nathany commented Jan 19, 2022

How can we get builds to run on external pull requests like this?

We don't have any secrets to worry about leaking.

@nshalman
Copy link
Contributor

nshalman commented Jan 19, 2022

How can we get builds to run on external pull requests like this?

We don't have any secrets to worry about leaking.

😄 #415 should do it. Alternately we could favor pull_request over push though I do still prefer both.
EDIT: We could/should also update the builds job accordingly whichever way we go.

@nshalman
Copy link
Contributor

nshalman commented Jan 24, 2022

Given @nathany's approval I think we should merge this. If the build times become onerous we can revisit moving them out to the forthcoming slow-tests that I'm planning for illumos. Better to err on the side of testing.

@nshalman nshalman merged commit c4cd7f3 into fsnotify:main Jan 24, 2022
24 checks passed
@r-darwish r-darwish deleted the fsnotify-389 branch Jan 24, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

fsnotify v1.5.0 and GOOS=freebsd does not build
3 participants