-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
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
ci: Actually bootstrap on i686 dist #48098
Conversation
Right now the `--build` option was accidentally omitted, so we're bootstraping from `x86_64` to `i686`. In addition to being slower (more compiles) that's not actually bootstrapping!
r? @kennytm |
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
The OpenSSL change looks unrelated, perhaps separate PR or separate commit? Otherwise though r=me. |
Heh I would have thought so too! That's actually required though as the dist-i686 builder fails without the change. When we |
Ah, makes sense. @bors r+ |
📌 Commit 9c05bab has been approved by |
@bors: rollup |
…p, r=Mark-Simulacrum ci: Actually bootstrap on i686 dist Right now the `--build` option was accidentally omitted, so we're bootstraping from `x86_64` to `i686`. In addition to being slower (more compiles) that's not actually bootstrapping!
…p, r=Mark-Simulacrum ci: Actually bootstrap on i686 dist Right now the `--build` option was accidentally omitted, so we're bootstraping from `x86_64` to `i686`. In addition to being slower (more compiles) that's not actually bootstrapping!
Right now the
--build
option was accidentally omitted, so we're bootstrapingfrom
x86_64
toi686
. In addition to being slower (more compiles) that's notactually bootstrapping!