-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 834
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.
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
Revert "Merge pull request #8072 from rizlik/github-fix" #8074
Conversation
Depends on wolfSSL/osp#205. |
Note that |
.github/workflows/jwt-cpp.yml
Outdated
ref: [ 0.6.0 ] | ||
ref: [ 0.7.0 ] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why are we not testing 0.6.0
anymore?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
0.6.0 does not compile on the latest compiler because of a build error.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should fix that error. What is the error?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/actions/runs/11485310894 for example passes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note that the example you gave uses the ubuntu-22.04
runner. It will fail on ubuntu-latest
. See: https://github.com/wolfSSL/wolfssl/actions/runs/11350595837/job/31569431321.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you don't want to invest time investigating the source of the error, we should at least run those tests on the version of Ubuntu it passes on. You can add the runner choice to the strategy to run 0.6 on the lts version and 0.7 on latest.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's not that I don't want to investigate the source of the error. It's simply adding in #include <cstdint.h>
into base.h
, which is what jwt-cpp
has already done. I have done as you suggested and just added a matrix
.
.github/workflows/sssd.yml
Outdated
jobs: | ||
build_wolfssl: | ||
name: Build wolfSSL | ||
# Just to keep it the same as the testing target | ||
runs-on: ubuntu-22.04 | ||
# This should be a safe limit for the tests to run. | ||
timeout-minutes: 4 | ||
steps: | ||
- name: Build wolfSSL | ||
uses: wolfSSL/actions-build-autotools-project@v1 | ||
with: | ||
path: wolfssl | ||
configure: --enable-all CFLAGS=-DWOLFSSL_NO_ASN_STRICT | ||
install: true | ||
check: false | ||
|
||
- name: tar build-dir | ||
run: tar -zcf build-dir.tgz build-dir | ||
|
||
- name: Upload built lib | ||
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 | ||
with: | ||
name: wolf-install-sssd | ||
path: build-dir.tgz | ||
retention-days: 5 | ||
|
||
sssd_check: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why are we including building wolfSSL in the sssd_check
job?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was just consolidating the job to be simpler. I didn't see a need to upload an artifact only to download it again. I could change the name of the stage if that's better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It simplifies the process of adding a new version so that testing can be done in parallel.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed, but we're only testing a single version so it seemed superfluous. I'll revert this change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It decreases the workload on the person updating the support. I think its worth it to separate on the initial write.
This reverts commit b215398.
This reverts commit 0f8b4db, reversing changes made to 743a78d.