-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 98
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
borg: fix asset mapping rules for borg >=1.4.0 #24685
Conversation
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.
Some comments from borgbackup developer.
pkgs/borgbackup/borg/registry.yaml
Outdated
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ packages: | |||
supported_envs: | |||
- linux/amd64 | |||
- darwin | |||
- version_constraint: semver("<= 1.1.18") | |||
- version_constraint: semver("<= 1.2.8") |
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.
Maybe rather use "< 1.4" (or so).
Some day there might be a 1.2.9 release, maybe even a 1.2.10.
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.
And those would use the old naming convention?
✅ changed
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.
Yes, within borg 1.2.x I will keep using the old naming convention.
borg 1.2.x will still be supported for a while, but likely I will stop making new 1.2.x releases once 1.4.x is practically proven to work well.
In general, borg 1.4 is quite similar to 1.2, kind of a "refreshed/modernised 1.2".
pkgs/borgbackup/borg/registry.yaml
Outdated
format: raw | ||
rosetta2: true | ||
replacements: | ||
amd64: x64 | ||
darwin: macos | ||
linux: linux-glibc231 |
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 am not familiar with aquaproj or its usages / users, but that means it will likely require glibc >= 2.31 on the target system.
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.
✅ Changed to the 2.28
```sh cmdx gr ```
pkgs/borgbackup/borg/registry.yaml
Outdated
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ packages: | |||
supported_envs: | |||
- linux/amd64 | |||
- darwin | |||
- version_constraint: semver("<= 1.1.18") | |||
- version_constraint: semver("< 1.4.0") |
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.
When we update version_constraint, we should add test data to pkg.yaml to support old versions.
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.
Basically, we use <=
instead of <
for consistency.
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.
Basically, we use
<=
instead of<
for consistency.
Oh, I see.
We haven't assumed back ports, but it makes sense.
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.
Is there a way to express that given the current syntax/conventions? Could we use >= 1.4.0
and leave the 1.2.x line without constraint for the time being?
fe05896 When we update pkgs/**/registry.yaml, we need to run |
v4.202.1 is out 🎉 |
Ah, thanks for picking this up, @suzuki-shunsuke! 🫶 I had quickly whipped together the draft from the browser as a discussion starter and hadn't gotten around to finishing off the PR. 😅 |
fixes #24684
Check List
Require signed commits
, so all commits must be signed