r-archr: add aarch64/arm64 builds #51397
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Martin Tzvetanov Grigorov <[email protected]>
martin-g
added
aarch64
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request involves modifications to the Possibly related PRs
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
recipes/r-archr/meta.yaml (1)
Line range hint
89-91: LGTM: License file update is appropriate, but consider updating license_family.The addition of the GPL-3 license file alongside GPL-2 is correct and consistent with the "GPL-2.0-or-later" license specified in the 'license' field.
Consider updating the 'license_family' field to reflect both GPL2 and GPL3. You can modify it as follows:
license_family: GPLThis change would more accurately represent the package's licensing under GPL-2.0-or-later.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- recipes/r-archr/meta.yaml (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
recipes/r-archr/meta.yaml (3)
16-16: LGTM: Build number increment is appropriate.The build number has been correctly incremented from 0 to 1. This is the expected practice when making changes to a package without altering its version number.
Line range hint
1-134: Summary: PR objectives achieved with minor suggestion.This PR successfully adds aarch64/arm64 builds for the r-archr package as intended. The changes made are appropriate and align with the PR objectives:
- The build number has been correctly incremented.
- Additional platforms (linux-aarch64 and osx-arm64) have been added.
- The license file section has been updated to include GPL-3.
A minor suggestion was made to update the 'license_family' field to better reflect the GPL-2.0-or-later licensing. Overall, the changes look good and achieve the desired outcome.
97-99: LGTM: Additional platforms added as intended.The addition of
linux-aarch64andosx-arm64platforms under theextrasection is correct and aligns with the PR objective of adding aarch64/arm64 builds.To ensure the build system recognizes these new platforms, please run the following command:
This command will show the package's dependencies and can help verify if the package is correctly built for the new platforms.
✅ Verification successful
Next Verification Step: Confirm Addition of New Platforms in
meta.yamlTo ensure that
linux-aarch64andosx-arm64have been correctly added to theadditional-platformssection ofrecipes/r-archr/meta.yaml, please run the following command:
Verified: New platforms correctly added in
meta.yaml.The platforms
linux-aarch64andosx-arm64have been successfully added under theadditional-platformssection inrecipes/r-archr/meta.yaml, confirming the PR objective of expanding architecture support.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the build system recognizes the new platforms conda inspect linkages -p $PREFIX r-archrLength of output: 108
Script:
# Verify that the new platforms are listed in meta.yaml rg -A2 'additional-platforms' recipes/r-archr/meta.yaml | rg 'linux-aarch64|osx-arm64'Length of output: 122
|
This fails because of old R version. I think if we added some more thorough testing, I'd be okay with newer versions. It's just that upstream has repeatedly declared that this was only stable developed with Bioconductor 3.15 (R 4.1) whenever users hit runtime issues when installing with newer Bioconductor versions. |
|
The ARM64 builds fail because of: and the recipe requires |
|
Thanks, @mfansler ! Are you aware that there is only osx-64 build at https://anaconda.org/bioconda/r-archr ? |
|
@martin-g no I didn't catch that - thanks for the heads up! I just hit "Re-run" on the failing CI - hopefully that works this time around. |
|
@martin-g that seems to have done the trick - thanks again! 🤩 I also saw a similar issue earlier with the |
Describe your pull request here
Please read the guidelines for Bioconda recipes before opening a pull request (PR).
General instructions
@BiocondaBot please add labelcommand.@bioconda/corein a comment.Instructions for avoiding API, ABI, and CLI breakage issues
Conda is able to record and lock (a.k.a. pin) dependency versions used at build time of other recipes.
This way, one can avoid that expectations of a downstream recipe with regards to API, ABI, or CLI are violated by later changes in the recipe.
If not already present in the meta.yaml, make sure to specify
run_exports(see here for the rationale and comprehensive explanation).Add a
run_exportssection like this:with
...being one of:{{ pin_subpackage("myrecipe", max_pin="x") }}{{ pin_subpackage("myrecipe", max_pin="x.x") }}{{ pin_subpackage("myrecipe", max_pin="x.x") }}(in such a case, please add a note that shortly mentions your evidence for that){{ pin_subpackage("myrecipe", max_pin="x.x.x") }}(in such a case, please add a note that shortly mentions your evidence for that){{ pin_subpackage("myrecipe", max_pin=None) }}while replacing
"myrecipe"with eithernameif aname|lowervariable is defined in your recipe or with the lowercase name of the package in quotes.Bot commands for PR management
Please use the following BiocondaBot commands:
Everyone has access to the following BiocondaBot commands, which can be given in a comment:
@BiocondaBot please update@BiocondaBot please add labelplease review & mergelabel.@BiocondaBot please fetch artifactsYou can use this to test packages locally.
Note that the
@BiocondaBot please mergecommand is now depreciated. Please just squash and merge instead.Also, the bot watches for comments from non-members that include
@bioconda/<team>and will automatically re-post them to notify the addressed<team>.