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 more robust checking of make dist. #8284

Closed
Ferroin opened this issue Mar 4, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #9218
Closed

Add more robust checking of make dist. #8284

Ferroin opened this issue Mar 4, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #9218
Assignees
Labels
area/ci area/packaging Packaging and operating systems support feature request New features

Comments

@Ferroin
Copy link
Member

Ferroin commented Mar 4, 2020

As of right now, our validation of make dist only reliably catches issues resulting from mandatory components in the install failing.

However, we now have a number of important optional components that we need to verify work correctly.

As a result, we need to update our checking to more robustly verify that installing from a tree prepared with make dist pulls everything in correctly.

@Ferroin Ferroin added area/ci area/packaging Packaging and operating systems support feature request New features labels Mar 4, 2020
@prologic
Copy link
Contributor

@Ferroin The "Checks / Dist" workflow is now migrated to GHA. Can you elaborate on what's needed here?

@Ferroin
Copy link
Member Author

Ferroin commented Mar 13, 2020

It needs #8382 merged and that flag needs to be used for the make dist builds. However, #8382 is effectively blocked pending completion of #8378, which will resolve the build failures being seen in it.

@prologic prologic removed their assignment Mar 19, 2020
@prologic
Copy link
Contributor

All yours then :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/ci area/packaging Packaging and operating systems support feature request New features
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants