Skip to content

Fix AppVeyor CI#1166

Closed
jkbonfield wants to merge 1 commit intosamtools:developfrom
jkbonfield:appveyor-keys
Closed

Fix AppVeyor CI#1166
jkbonfield wants to merge 1 commit intosamtools:developfrom
jkbonfield:appveyor-keys

Conversation

@jkbonfield
Copy link
Contributor

The keys used to sign MSYS package have changed, so we have to update the key store first.

The next problem is that newer MSYS packages are compressed with zstd, but the installed pacman cannot handle these. We eed to explicitly update pacman first.

Then finally we can install our build system.

Note none of this is strictly necessary. The alternative solution is to comment out all pacman updates as the base image has sufficient compilers and libraries to build and pass the test harness.

The main difference is the lack of libcurl, which then means we don't test compilation of the components that depend on it. We don't test these anyway, but it's useful to know they build at least. However if we hit problems in the future due to the explicit path of those key files then that's a viable temporary workaround.

(It may be that AppVeyor also updates their base image at some point, in which case the key shenanigans can be deleted.)

The keys used to sign MSYS package have changed, so we have to
update the key store first.

The next problem is that newer MSYS packages are compressed with zstd,
but the installed pacman cannot handle these.  We need to explicitly
update pacman first.

Then finally we can install our build system.

Note none of this is strictly necessary.  The alternative solution is
to comment out all pacman updates as the base image has sufficient
compilers and libraries to build and pass the test harness.

The main difference is the lack of libcurl, which then means we don't
test compilation of the components that depend on it.  We don't test
these anyway, but it's useful to know they build at least.  However if
we hit problems in the future due to the explicit path of those key
files then that's a viable temporary workaround.

(It may be that AppVeyor also updates their base image at some point,
in which case the key shenanigans can be deleted.)
@daviesrob
Copy link
Member

appveyor/ci#3513 suggests switching to the Visual Studio 2019 image to get an up-to-date pacman. Yes, I know we're not using Visual Studio, see https://www.appveyor.com/docs/build-environment/ for the available Windows images - we were using Visual Studio 2015. I think that solution may have more longevity than bootstrapping a working pacman ourselves.

I've tested it in my branch https://github.com/daviesrob/htslib/tree/appveyor_img, and managed to get a successful build.

@jkbonfield
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah I didn't realise there were newer images to choose from. :-)

Yes I prefer that solution. Can we get this fixed soon please? It's a right PITA at the moment.

@daviesrob
Copy link
Member

I turned my branch into #1172

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.

2 participants

Comments