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

Fix OSTYPE check in ci_install.sh #11801

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Dec 20, 2023
Merged

Conversation

jtpio
Copy link
Member

@jtpio jtpio commented Jan 7, 2022

References

As noticed in #11770 (comment), the check against $OSTYPE in the ci_install.sh script doesn't seem to be hit at the moment.

Code changes

Update CI install script to see if this has any affect on the CI checks.

User-facing changes

None

Backwards-incompatible changes

None

@jupyterlab-probot
Copy link

Thanks for making a pull request to jupyterlab!
To try out this branch on binder, follow this link: Binder

@jtpio jtpio added this to the 4.0 milestone Jan 7, 2022
@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jan 11, 2022

The failing release_test check looks relevant: https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab/runs/4742334615?check_suite_focus=true

image

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Dec 6, 2023

So both check_release and release_test seem to be passing if we use jlpm instead of yarn.

Taking a second look at it, it seems we are using jlpm in the other @jupyterlab/buildutils scripts.

cc @blink1073 just to confirm such change would be appropriate.

@jtpio jtpio marked this pull request as ready for review December 6, 2023 13:25
@blink1073
Copy link
Member

Yes that sounds correct.

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Dec 15, 2023

cc @jupyterlab/release for awareness

This should be good to go now.

Copy link
Member

@krassowski krassowski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this makes sense, though I do not have the full context here.

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Dec 20, 2023

Thanks @krassowski and @blink1073 for the review!

though I do not have the full context here.

This is mostly to fix this condition on CI noticed in #11770 (comment).

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Dec 20, 2023

Merging as CI is now all passing.

@jtpio jtpio merged commit a2b5e71 into jupyterlab:main Dec 20, 2023
77 checks passed
@jtpio jtpio deleted the ostype-ci-install branch December 20, 2023 08:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants