-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 372
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
cross run: stdin doesn't work #52
Labels
Comments
pitkley
added a commit
to pitkley/rust-embedded-cross
that referenced
this issue
Dec 10, 2017
This fixes issue cross-rs#52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Dec 16, 2017
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 12, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 23, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 24, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 24, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 17, 2018
Don't allocate a pseudo-TTY This fixes issue #52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the Docker `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross. From my arguably limited tests, I have [confirmed](https://gist.github.com/pitkley/c581f612225688937cc8b7f3a7deff9a) that `echo hello | cross run` works. Furthermore, this enables me to run `cross build` in a Gitlab CI job, which otherwise also failed with the error mentioned in #52: `the input device is not a TTY`.
I'm having the same issue when running Would it be possible to disable the use of |
arsing
pushed a commit
to arsing/cross
that referenced
this issue
Feb 28, 2019
This fixes issue cross-rs#52 as far as I can tell. Since documentation on the `-t` flag is rather sparse, I am not sure if this has any negative implications on existing usage of cross.
Similar issue for Azure Pipelines. |
shouldn't it be closed by #294 ? |
Yes, this should be fixed. |
arsing
added a commit
to arsing/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 10, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
arsing
added a commit
to arsing/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 10, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
arsing
added a commit
to arsing/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 10, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
This was referenced Mar 11, 2022
kodiakhq bot
pushed a commit
to Azure/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 11, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
kodiakhq bot
pushed a commit
to Azure/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 11, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
arsing
added a commit
to arsing/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 11, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e Unlike the other branches, this uses cross 0.1 and not 0.2. This is because this branch builds one additional target, iotedge-proxy for x86_64-unknown-linux-musl, to make an iotedge-proxy Docker image for Kubernetes. We do not have a custom builder image for this target, so cross 0.2 would use upstream's image, which does not have openssl. We could use cross 0.2 with a custom image, like we do for the ARM targets (see Cross.toml), but for now this change just sticks with cross 0.1. The openssl in 0.1's image is still ancient (the image hasn't been updated in 4 years), but Dave said that can be tackled separately later, as part of updating openssl across this branch in general.
arsing
added a commit
to arsing/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 11, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e The image-linux-rust job uses cross 0.1 and not 0.2. This is because this job builds iotedge-proxy for x86_64-unknown-linux-musl, to make an iotedge-proxy Docker image for Kubernetes. We do not have a custom builder image for this target, so cross 0.2 would use upstream's image, which does not have openssl. We *could* use cross 0.2 with a custom image, like we do for the ARM targets (see Cross.toml), but for now this change just sticks with cross 0.1. The openssl in 0.1's image is still ancient (the image hasn't been updated in 4 years), but Dave said that can be tackled later, as part of updating openssl across this branch in general.
kodiakhq bot
pushed a commit
to Azure/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Mar 12, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e This commit also removes jobs used to build iotedged and iotedge-proxy in Docker containers, since these were only used for Kubernetes, but Kubernetes stuff lives in the release/1.1-k8s-preview branch. Dave had removed the .Net parts of Kubernetes support from release/1.1 earlier, so he suggested removing the Rust parts too.
damonbarry
pushed a commit
to damonbarry/iotedge
that referenced
this issue
Apr 15, 2022
The fix we needed was merged into upstream a long time ago. Ref: cross-rs/cross#52 Ref: cross-rs/cross@249500e
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: