Re: [m-users.] Installing MMC over MMC
fabrice nicol <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.mercury.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Admittedly so, Julien. When this happens (it does not too often), then there is no way of building mmc until a fixed ROTD is released by the team. As the Docker algo fetches fresh ROTDs on a rolling basis as they are released, if a crash occurs in some GitHub action run, it will automatically be fixed within a couple of days. This is what the backlog of GH actions shows anyway. So that empirically, released images/packages are always coherent as only successful builds get released by the GH scripts (then to DockerHub). F. Le 12/11/2022 à 14:13, Julien Fischer a écrit : > > > On Sat, 12 Nov 2022, fabrice nicol wrote: > >> Yes it works, this is the algo used by the everyday Docker build >> released on Github. >> >> It contains two builds: one fresh ROTD as a bootrap and a repo >> version built at HEAD with the bootstrap ROTD build. >> >> https://github.com/fabnicol/gentoo4mercury/releases >> >> (note: there are Ubuntu and Alpine releases too, but these have had >> distribution-related issues for a few days. Nothing related with >> Mercury source code). > > That seems problematic in the case where we delete or rename a standard > library module between the ROTD and the repo head; you may end up with > interface files hanging about for a library module that no longer > exists. > > (Voker's use case is fine since he is just reinstalling the same version > and will necessarily have the same set of library modules.) > > Julien. _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mercurylang.org/listinfo/users