Skip to content

Conversation

@roed314
Copy link
Contributor

@roed314 roed314 commented Feb 7, 2023

I've gotten several emails from github describing failed CI runs, and pointing to errors in the workflow files. This PR attempts to fix these errors.

Copy link
Contributor

@alexjbest alexjbest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@tobiasdiez tobiasdiez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think its better to reduce this PR to the fix ofthe cygwin workflow as the other workflows are already fixed in #34964 and #34987

@roed314 roed314 requested a review from tobiasdiez February 7, 2023 14:57
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (develop@200557e). Click here to learn what that means.
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             develop   #35005   +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage           ?   88.58%           
==========================================
  Files              ?     2136           
  Lines              ?   396141           
  Branches           ?        0           
==========================================
  Hits               ?   350933           
  Misses             ?    45208           
  Partials           ?        0           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@saraedum
Copy link
Member

saraedum commented Feb 7, 2023

@roed314 the diff here is not empty after merging in develop. What should happen with these changes?

@roed314 roed314 changed the title Fix develop Fix CI workflow errors Feb 7, 2023
@roed314
Copy link
Contributor Author

roed314 commented Feb 7, 2023

I updated the title and description.

@tobiasdiez
Copy link
Contributor

I tried to run the updated workflow from the main repo to check that the changes work as intended, but that doesn't work as it is in a different repo.

Can you please activate github actions in your fork, make the fix-develop the default branch of your fork, and then manually trigger the cygwin workflow.

@roed314
Copy link
Contributor Author

roed314 commented Feb 8, 2023

I manually triggered it, and got the following error:

[Invalid workflow file: .github/workflows/ci-cygwin-standard.yml#L67](https://github.com/roed314/sage/actions/runs/4124922889/workflow)
The workflow is not valid. .github/workflows/ci-cygwin-standard.yml (Line: 67, Col: 28): Invalid input, local_artifact_name is not defined in the referenced workflow. .github/workflows/ci-cygwin-standard.yml (Line: 68, Col: 27): Invalid input, logs_artifact_name is not defined in the referenced workflow.

I'm working on another issue, but I'll try to come back to this later today.

@roed314
Copy link
Contributor Author

roed314 commented Feb 9, 2023

Alright, I don't understand how to write these CI files, and I'm failing to figure out how to fix the problem. I'll create an issue to deal with this and close this PR (which was originally intended for fixing the checkmarks in CI).

@roed314 roed314 closed this Feb 9, 2023
@roed314 roed314 mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2023
@roed314 roed314 deleted the fix-develop branch February 9, 2023 18:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants