Skip to content

update the released package name in Docker image construction#1397

Closed
Geal wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
geal/use-the-new-package-name-in-diy-docker
Closed

update the released package name in Docker image construction#1397
Geal wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
geal/use-the-new-package-name-in-diy-docker

Conversation

@Geal
Copy link
Contributor

@Geal Geal commented Jul 13, 2022

We changed the released package names in #1393 to include the full
target triplet

⚠️ do not merge this until we have published a release containing #1393

We changed the released package names in #1393 to include the full
target triplet
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@Geal your pull request is missing a changelog!

Copy link
Contributor

@garypen garypen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good timing. I was just going to do that!

Copy link
Contributor

@garypen garypen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, now that I've approved it, it does mean that it will only work from the next release forwards. We'll have to watch out for that if anyone files an issue.

@abernix
Copy link
Member

abernix commented Jul 18, 2022

@Geal @garypen Couldn't both the waiting for the release and the "forward support only" both be avoided if we used the installer script rather than the direct link to the tarball? The installer script works off GitHub Releases so the latest points to the latest release and the installer that gets used is based on the install.sh script rather than the hard-coded link to the tarball.

I'd also argue that we should be doing that anyways to make sure all the downloads are going through an endpoint that we control. If that makes sense, I'm happy to make a PR.

@garypen
Copy link
Contributor

garypen commented Jul 18, 2022

I think the existing code pre-dates the creation of the installer script, so bringing it into line with the installer seems sensible.
Would there be a timing issue during the processing of the release?

I presume the PR would be to replace the explicit ADD of a version with a RUN of the installer?

@Geal
Copy link
Contributor Author

Geal commented Aug 26, 2022

closing in favor of #1629

@Geal Geal closed this Aug 26, 2022
@Geal Geal deleted the geal/use-the-new-package-name-in-diy-docker branch August 26, 2022 11:05
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.

3 participants