8000 Post link last by soapy1 · Pull Request #8350 · conda/conda · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Post link last #8350

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 6, 2019
Merged

Post link last #8350

merged 8 commits into from
Mar 6, 2019

Conversation

soapy1
Copy link
Contributor
@soapy1 soapy1 commented Feb 26, 2019

No description provided.

@soapy1 soapy1 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 26, 2019 23:43
@@ -524,14 +524,39 @@ def _verify(cls, prefix_setups, prefix_action_groups):
return exceptions

@classmethod
def _execute(cls, all_action_groups):
def _execute(cls, prefix_action_groups):
groups = list(interleave(itervalues(prefix_action_groups)))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can a tuple be used here rather than a list? Perhaps creating a dictionary with action types would be even better so the actions do not need to be referred to by indices below.

@@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ def execute(self):
assert not context.dry_run

try:
self._execute(self.prefix_action_groups)
self._execute(tuple(concat(interleave(itervalues(self.prefix_action_groups)))))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I often find it better for debugging purposes to have data prep steps separate from function calls. I find that it makes tweaking and inspecting what goes into the function easier. This is not blocking this PR - just something to think about.

@msarahan
Copy link
Contributor
msarahan commented Mar 4, 2019

Is this covered by existing tests, or should we add something new?

@soapy1
Copy link
Contributor Author
soapy1 commented Mar 4, 2019

Looks like there are some tests https://github.com/conda/conda/blob/master/tests/test_create.py#L2050-L2072. I think they cover the basic functionality. Do you think a test is needed to do something like ensure order of actions running?

@msarahan
Copy link
Contributor
msarahan commented Mar 4, 2019

That could be good for peace of mind. I think you should do something like:

package a: depends on b. post-link script depends on the presence of a file created by b (errors if not present)
package b: generates a file in $PREFIX in a post-link script

the key being alphabetical order intentionally not working, and things only working if toposort is done correctly.

@soapy1 soapy1 force-pushed the post-link-last branch 2 times, most recently from a06dbb9 to 380f82e Compare March 6, 2019 16:22
@msarahan
Copy link
Contributor
msarahan commented Mar 6, 2019

failure on appveyor is because the test packages are not available for win-32. Could they be noarch?

@soapy1
Copy link
Contributor Author
soapy1 commented Mar 6, 2019

Updated packages are kicked the win-32 build

@msarahan msarahan merged commit c75407e into conda:master Mar 6, 2019
@github-actions
Copy link

Hi there, thank you for your contribution to Conda!

This pull request has been automatically locked since it has not had recent activity after it was closed.

Please open a new issue or pull request if needed.

81F4

@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked [bot] locked due to inactivity label Aug 29, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 29, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
locked [bot] locked due to inactivity
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants
0