win: more robust parsing of SDK version#1198
Conversation
| Win10SDKVer = Math.Max(Win10SDKVer, UInt32.Parse(id.Substring(Win10SDKPrefix.Length))); | ||
| else if (id == "Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.Windows81SDK") | ||
| else if (id.StartsWith(Win10SDKPrefix)) { | ||
| string[] parts = id.ToString().Substring(Win10SDKPrefix.Length).Split('.'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Superfluous ToString() call?
| else if (id == "Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.Windows81SDK") | ||
| else if (id.StartsWith(Win10SDKPrefix)) { | ||
| string[] parts = id.Substring(Win10SDKPrefix.Length).Split('.'); | ||
| Win10SDKVer = Math.Max(Win10SDKVer, UInt32.Parse(parts[0])); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Only the Desktop C++ SDK is good, according to https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/install/workload-component-id-vs-community it has .Desktop appended. What about:
- Win10SDKVer = Math.Max(Win10SDKVer, UInt32.Parse(parts[0]));
+ if (parts.Length == 1 || (parts.Length == 2 && parts[1] == "Desktop"))
+ Win10SDKVer = Math.Max(Win10SDKVer, UInt32.Parse(parts[0]));
+ else
+ continue;
| else if (id == "Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.Windows81SDK") | ||
| else if (id.StartsWith(Win10SDKPrefix)) { | ||
| string[] parts = id.Substring(Win10SDKPrefix.Length).Split('.'); | ||
| if (parts.Length == 2 && parts[1] != "Desktop") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is already a Microsoft.VisualStudio.Component.Windows10SDK.15063.UWP.Native that this does not catch
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👎 for Microsoft.
Enhanced the guard.
|
@refack can you land here or should I? (we should still wait for the 72h) |
|
@joaocgreis I don't have write here (yet?), after we land we need to ping one of the package owners to package a patch version. |
|
v0.12 failed, here is another run: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/nodegyp-test-commit/113/ . This one passed. |
PR-URL: nodejs#1198 Fixes: nodejs#1179 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: João Reis <[email protected]>
|
Landed in bad903a |
|
This should go into |
|
/cc @rvagg @bnoordhuis @joaocgreis @nodejs/node-gyp |
|
👍 done, v3.6.2, thanks @refack |
No, thank you! |
4 participants
Fixes: #1179
Personally I prefer #1178, but this is smaller.