Skip to content

Fix fetch of spec.yaml files from buildcache#19101

Merged
scottwittenburg merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
pipelines-fix-binary-install
Oct 1, 2020
Merged

Fix fetch of spec.yaml files from buildcache#19101
scottwittenburg merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
pipelines-fix-binary-install

Conversation

@scottwittenburg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them. This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.

Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
@scottwittenburg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

FYI @reviewers: The failure on the gitlab pipeline is unrelated to this PR. That failure is caused by #18196.

Do I need to comment aml out of the E4S stack for the time being so we can get all green? Or can we just get this merged ASAP since it makes the pipeline work again?

@scottwittenburg scottwittenburg merged commit d3d9807 into develop Oct 1, 2020
@scottwittenburg scottwittenburg deleted the pipelines-fix-binary-install branch October 1, 2020 20:32
@scottwittenburg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

FYI @eugeneswalker

robertu94 pushed a commit to robertu94/spack that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2020
Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
scottwittenburg added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2020
scheibelp pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2020
This reverts #18359 and follow-on PRs intended to address issues with
#18359 because that PR changes the hash of all specs. A future PR will
reintroduce the changes.

* Revert "Fix location in spec.yaml where we look for full_hash (#19132)"
* Revert "Fix fetch of spec.yaml files from buildcache (#19101)"
* Revert "Merge pull request #18359 from scottwittenburg/add-binary-distribution-cache-manager"
scottwittenburg added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2020
Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
scottwittenburg added a commit to scottwittenburg/spack that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2020
Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
scottwittenburg added a commit to scottwittenburg/spack that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2020
Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
scottwittenburg added a commit to scottwittenburg/spack that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2020
Since those files currently exist in buildcaches (in S3 buckets) with
potentially different content types, we should be less restrictive in
what content types we accept when attempting to fetch them.  This PR
removes the content type constraint so any file with the matching
name will be found.
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.

2 participants