-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
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.
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
No arch dependencies (such as jar files) should not be filtered out #335
Comments
To have my tests passing, I simply added:
to the test setup, for my dependency; because if the purl is not empty, |
* update .gitignore * add purl to test so that it does not fail on arm64, see: paketo-buildpacks/libpak#335
* update .gitignore * add purl to test so that it does not fail on arm64, see: paketo-buildpacks/libpak#335
I'm going to close this out because I think it's working as designed at the moment. You need to have something in the PURL and for reference, if anyone else sees this issue, #335 (comment) is what you should add. Also, we're hopefully going to have #327 implemented soon and that should clear up some of this as well. |
* update .gitignore * add purl to test so that it does not fail on arm64, see: paketo-buildpacks/libpak#335
* update .gitignore * add purl to test so that it does not fail on arm64, see: paketo-buildpacks/libpak#335
With the support for dual arch, such filters were added:
https://github.com/paketo-buildpacks/libpak/blob/620bd46eb3bf74d4af08246b0815bd0589e53f7b/buildpack.go#L511C1-L518C4
Now, I'm running tests for
spring-boot
buildpack currently, and mysystem arch
isarm64
During my test run, I'm asserting Spring-Cloud-Bindings jar is downloaded, but because of:
no PURL was given, so it defaults to
amd64
and now my dependency is skipped
I'm no longer sure what the best course of action is:
arch=arm64
if the tests run onarm64
)arch
in the piece of code above to empty string and if it's empty string, then consider the dependency to be resolved on all arch.arch
(Implement RFC 0059 - Update metadata to be consistent with RFC standard #327)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: