Bump alibuild to 1.17.7 on centos&ubuntu repos #1362
Conversation
This version has been available for a while and seems stable. The most notable change is managing the git repos with --filter=tree:0, which should mean a notably smaller sw/ folder size
|
@singiamtel is alma9 included in this? as in the el9 repository the latest alibuild version is 1.16.1 |
|
oh, my bad, i saw in changes that it is... but also note that fedora33 is not among us anymore, it would be best if fedora is to be supported to use fedora 40 |
Sure, using fedora 40 now
Yeah, I'd prefer to keep the same alibuild version for all repos if possible |
.github/workflows/o2-full-deps.yml
Outdated
| @@ -64,14 +64,14 @@ jobs: | |||
| set -x | |||
| rpmbuild -ba "rpms/o2-prereq-$DISTRO.spec" | |||
| git clone -b "$ALIBUILD_TAG" https://github.com/alisw/alibuild | |||
| cd alibuild | |||
| cd alibuild || exit | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you check if it is running with set -e?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is a cleaner fix indeed, and actionlint doesn't seem to complain. It's now implemented
|
Just tested the centos7 action, and it fails with the same yum repo missing issue. Should we delete it? |
|
Can we fix it using vault.cern.ch? I am afraid we still have a few things on Centos7. |
singiamtel
force-pushed
the
update_alibuild_repos
branch
from
3305788 to
a1de8be
Compare
singiamtel
force-pushed
the
update_alibuild_repos
branch
from
a1de8be to
99d1ba4
Compare
singiamtel
force-pushed
the
update_alibuild_repos
branch
from
9cc0f1f to
60c2122
Compare
Sure, did the workaround I also had an issue with the Node runner (actions/runner#2906), there is a workaround but we should get it of it as soon as we can drop CentOS 7 support |
|
We also need the workaround for pip, apparently. See https://github.com/alisw/ali-bot/actions/runs/9805778473. Can you take care of it? |
@ktf Haven't managed to fix this yet, the python version on their repos is just too old for the new pip. Building python from source would probably work but it means we'd get the compiler toolchain on the image, and the action would take considerably longer to run too How should we proceed? Edit: Wrong ping |
This version has been available for a while and seems stable. The most
notable change is managing the git repos with --filter=tree:0, which
should mean a notably smaller sw/ folder size
Setting it to draft as centos7 is now EOL, so the action might fail when trying to deploy to those repos