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

DM-35510: Only set binary root for x86_64 arch. #163

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 8, 2022
Merged

Conversation

ktlim
Copy link
Contributor

@ktlim ktlim commented Jul 8, 2022

No description provided.

url="$binary_root/env/${eups_tag}.env"
else
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm confused on why given an env hash this must fail for src installations?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Because exact envs are only recorded for tarball builds. An exact env has platform-specific conda packages in it, so it's not meaningful to preserve it with source tags.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah I would have figured it would have been the resolved env at the time of tagging a given product, but I understand the limitations as they exist currently.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Even conda env export has platform-specific packages (e.g. _sysroot_linux-64_curr_repodata_hack=3=h5bd9786_13). I don't think there's any way to get a platform-independent "resolved" env beyond the rubin-env version number.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldn't it be the union of the exact versions of the packages in the env, and their dependencies? I guess that could keep growing, like you say until you got to platform specific packages. I wonder if the set of those are small enough to be enumerated and not considered in src builds? Maybe its not worth the time.

@ktlim ktlim merged commit b80e610 into main Jul 8, 2022
@ktlim ktlim deleted the tickets/DM-35510 branch July 8, 2022 17:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants