Skip to content

update lmdb to 1.0 #16223

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
kit-ty-kate merged 5 commits into from
Apr 22, 2020
Merged

update lmdb to 1.0 #16223

kit-ty-kate merged 5 commits into from
Apr 22, 2020

Conversation

@madroach
Copy link
Contributor

@madroach madroach commented Apr 18, 2020

No description provided.

@madroach madroach mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2020
Merged
4 tasks
@camelus
Copy link
Contributor

camelus commented Apr 18, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Commit: 8007ec7

@madroach has posted 14 contributions.

☀️ All lint checks passed 8007ec7
  • These packages passed lint tests: lmdb.1.0
☀️ Installability check (+1)
  • new installable packages (1): lmdb.1.0

Christopher Zimmermann added 2 commits April 19, 2020 10:28
alpine linux needs lmdb-dev
91cbf6d
remove depexts for OpenSUSE, RHEL and CentOS
bd630c4 
OpenSUSE, RHEL and CentOS don't seem to ship lmdb-devel.
For RHEL and CentOS it is available from EPEL:
http://mirrors.syringanetworks.net/fedora-epel/8/Everything/x86_64/Packages/l/lmdb-devel-0.9.23-2.el8.x86_64.rpm

Is it possible to explain this to depexts ?
@madroach
Copy link
Contributor Author

madroach commented Apr 19, 2020

For RHEL and CentOS lmdb-devel would need to be installed from EPEL. Is this possible via depext ?
The build failure on Ubuntu xenial is due to a bug in the outdated backend lmdb 0.9.17.

@madroach madroach marked this pull request as ready for review April 19, 2020 10:00
@madroach madroach mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2020
Closed
kit-ty-kate
kit-ty-kate reviewed Apr 21, 2020
View reviewed changes
@kit-ty-kate
Copy link
Member

kit-ty-kate commented Apr 21, 2020

Could you also return my fix upstream?

@madroach
Copy link
Contributor Author

madroach commented Apr 21, 2020

Sure I will merge this back upstream. Why did you remove the build tag on dune ?

@kit-ty-kate
Copy link
Member

kit-ty-kate commented Apr 22, 2020

Sure I will merge this back upstream. Why did you remove the build tag on dune ?

dune is only partially backward compatible. If it were to be downgraded for any reason, all the packages that were installed with a newer version would be totally unusable and the whole switch would have to be rebuilt. See #14266 and ocaml/dune#2147 for more informations.

@kit-ty-kate
Copy link
Member

kit-ty-kate commented Apr 22, 2020

Thanks a lot!

@kit-ty-kate kit-ty-kate merged commit 55d164f into ocaml:master Apr 22, 2020
@madroach
Copy link
Contributor Author

madroach commented Apr 22, 2020

Ok. I get it about the build tag on dune. But why remove it for dune-configurator ?

@kit-ty-kate
Copy link
Member

kit-ty-kate commented Apr 22, 2020

mmh, good point, I guess dune-configurator can still be a {build} dependency but in the general case it doesn't usually matter as dune and dune-configurator usually upgrades in pair.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@kit-ty-kate kit-ty-kate kit-ty-kate left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

needs reporter action

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@madroach @camelus @kit-ty-kate