fix: stop building codex-exec and codex-linux-sandbox binaries #2036
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pakrym-oai
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2025
Collaborator
Author
|
https://github.com/openai/codex/releases/tag/rust-v0.20.0-alpha.2 is 17 assets instead of 41! |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Release builds are taking awhile and part of the reason that we are building binaries that we are not really using. Adding Windows binaries into releases (#2035) slows things down, so we need to get some time back.
codex-execis basically a standalonecodex execthat we were offering because it's a bit smaller as it does not include all the bits to power the TUI. We were using it in our experimental GitHub Action, so this PR updates the Action to usecodex execinstead.codex-linux-sandboxwas a helper binary for the TypeScript version of the CLI, but I am about to axe that, so we don't need this either.If we decide to bring
codex-execback at some point, we should use a separate instances so we can build it in parallel withcodex. (I think if we had beefier build machines, this wouldn't be so bad, but that's not the case with the default runners from GitHub.)