Improve disable by architecture #760
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #760 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 87.17% 87.18% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 29 29
Lines 2970 2982 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 2589 2600 +11
- Misses 381 382 +1
📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more |
|
@davidrohr @martenole @awegrzyn: this should allow us to say that we do not want to bother about OpenSSL on anything but slc7. Either by stating: which will simply disable the package on anything which is not slc7, or by saying: which will consider the @awegrzyn could you please have a look? In principle this allows us to drop the |
|
@TimoWilken could you cross check this makes sense? |
|
@ktf : thx, I think this makes a lot of sense (haven't tested it myself though). |
This allows us to define that a given package can only be built on certain architectures. This is done via the architecture tag, e.g.: architecture: slc7 # build on slc7 only architecture: (?!osx) # Do not build on macOS architecture: (slc7|slc6) # Only slc6 and slc7 This avoids having to specify in every dependent of the package the conditional requirement string. It also has the advantage that when a package is disabled, but still present on the system because
This allows people to define system requirements also for packages which have a recipe. It also falls back to prefer_system_check when system_requirement_check is missing. This will allow us, for example to say: system_requirement: (ubuntu|osx) for packages which want to pick up from the system on those two architectures, e.g. openssl.
singiamtel
force-pushed
the
improve-disable-by-architecture
branch
from
52b7718
to
f43ac2e
Compare
No description provided.