-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 78
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
Update C++ dependencies, roughly matching ones used in python. #5472
Conversation
|
I think the version of protobuf will need to be updated in concert with the version grpc supports ie #5299
|
Looks like grpc-java is sticking with 3.x at this time due to known issues. The advice right now is
|
# Previously used version: v1.2.11 | ||
git clone $GIT_FLAGS -b v1.2.13 --depth 1 "${GITHUB_BASE_URL}/madler/zlib" | ||
# Previously used version: v1.2.13 | ||
git clone $GIT_FLAGS -b v1.3 --depth 1 "${GITHUB_BASE_URL}/madler/zlib" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need to specify the patch version, or are we ok with that changing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a specific version, is just the name they gave, in git terms is just some arbitrary string. Mean as far as I understand how the universe works, that won't change when they create a new version.
# Previously used version: v3.21.2 | ||
git clone $GIT_FLAGS -b v25.3 --depth 1 "${GITHUB_BASE_URL}/protocolbuffers/protobuf.git" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- Were we ultra out of date?
- Did they change their versioning convention?
- Do we need to specify the patch version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- No, they changed in weird ways they numbering, and managed to confuse a lot of people in the process. They also introduced some backwards incompatibilities which is why we can't go directly to 26
- Yes, see above.
- No, like the previous answer, that tag should not change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
R stuff looks good
The goal is actually to build python dependencies with debug info; this is a step.
The change to base-images happened first here: deephaven/deephaven-base-images#116