Skip to content

Use "fat" zic binaries in CI tests#1076

Merged
pganssle merged 3 commits into
dateutil:masterfrom
pganssle:no_slim
Aug 28, 2020
Merged

Use "fat" zic binaries in CI tests#1076
pganssle merged 3 commits into
dateutil:masterfrom
pganssle:no_slim

Conversation

@pganssle

@pganssle pganssle commented Aug 28, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary of changes

The CI failures are basically manifestations of #1059 (which can be resolved along with #590 when we backport the logic from zoneinfo).

I don't want this to continue blocking things and it's a known issue, so I've changed the test to always use the "fat" binaries until #590 is resolved.

Pull Request Checklist

@pganssle pganssle changed the title Default to using "fat" tarballs in CI tests Default to using "fat" zic binaries in CI tests Aug 28, 2020
@pganssle
pganssle force-pushed the no_slim branch 3 times, most recently from d16a92e to f411724 Compare August 28, 2020 18:14
@pganssle pganssle changed the title Default to using "fat" zic binaries in CI tests Use "fat" zic binaries in CI tests Aug 28, 2020
@pganssle
pganssle force-pushed the no_slim branch 3 times, most recently from b7c6f48 to f717a02 Compare August 28, 2020 19:01
At the moment, we do not support Version 2 files (see dateutilGH-590), and many
zones will be inaccurate *today* when dateutil.tz is used with a slim
binary. For the moment, we'll force fat binaries. In the long term,
we'll migrate to something like zoneinfo.
This should be reverted when support for version 2+ TZif files is added
(see dateutilGH-1059).
@pganssle
pganssle merged commit c496b4f into dateutil:master Aug 28, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant