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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Node.js 12 TODO: Switch to Linux for generating source & headers tarballs #1730

Closed
rvagg opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Node.js 12 TODO: Switch to Linux for generating source & headers tarballs #1730

rvagg opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
ci-change PSA of configuration changes ci-release

Comments

@rvagg
Copy link
Member

rvagg commented Mar 17, 2019

This is currently done on macOS along with docs. Depending on the workflow we might want to switch docs to Linux too. This has been a persistent problem (e.g. #1658) and is to do with the difference between the macOS / BSD tar and GNU tar. I believe GNU tar provides us with maximum compatibility and should make errors go away.

For safety I think we should make this change only happen for Node >= 12. It's going to require some work in the VersionSelectorScript and/or ci-release/iojs+release scripts to switch logic.
@rvagg rvagg changed the title Node.js TODO: Switch to Linux for generating source & headers tarballs Node.js 12 TODO: Switch to Linux for generating source & headers tarballs Mar 17, 2019
@refack refack added ci-release ci-change PSA of configuration changes labels Mar 17, 2019
This was referenced Apr 16, 2019
Closed
Merged
@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Apr 18, 2019

solved in #1777, nightlies as of today use centos7 to generate all non-binary assets.

@rvagg rvagg closed this as completed Apr 18, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ci-change PSA of configuration changes ci-release
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@refack @rvagg