-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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
gopass.gopass version 1.15.7 #118873
gopass.gopass version 1.15.7 #118873
Conversation
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Manual Validation failed with:
It appears that the dependency |
@stephengillie I'm confused
As mentioned in #106108 (comment), this is not a hard dependency, i.e. you can install the gopass package without it, but you cannot meaningfully use it without an encryption backend. So a "solution" could be to just remove the dependencies, but that doesn't strike me as the most user-friendly solution. 🤷🏻♂️ |
I tried with a modified manifest. Swapped
|
Thanks, @stephengillie! I still don't understand why a x64 program requiring a x86 dependency is flagged as a problem? That's the basic issue here, correct?
If that is really the case, I don't see how winget dependency management is going to work in practice. Relatedly, I don't understand, why I as a submitter, can only be alerted to this ☝🏻 after you run your custom/manual validation?
I am referring to the validation pipeline here on GH.
x64 vs x86 isn't a Defender problem, though, is it? |
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
I hope removing the deps resolves this. |
@wingetbot waivers Add Validation-Executable-Error |
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Yes - it installs and launches normally.
|
Yes. I'm guessing matching might have been added to prevent
I understand your concerns and wish I had a better way to address them. It might not be matching on all 3 attributes.
The information might have been in the validation run logs, but I wasn't expecting this error here, so I haven't added it to my log gathering script. The
Oh, sorry for misunderstanding. Unfortunately, not every program can pass Automated Validation, and so we added a very small team to perform a manual review and complete the validation. The manual process can only perform some of the checks that the Automated Validation pipeline performs, and we've pushed the manual process innovations upstream to the Automated pipeline in recent months.
No, it's not, as Defender doesn't run in either 32-bit nor 64-bit Sandbox. I wish it did, as it could streamline validation in situations like this. |
dpprdan, The check-in policies require a moderator to approve PRs from the community. Our moderators are community volunteers, please be patient and allow them sufficient time to review your submission. Template: msftbot/requiresApproval/moderator |
Hello dpprdan, Template: msftbot/validationCompleted |
Publish pipeline succeeded for this Pull Request. Once you refresh your index, this change should be present. |
@dpprdan we haven't implemented: That's part of the issue with dependencies using different architectures. We won't be fully automating validation with dependencies until a couple of weeks after WinGet 1.6 goes GA (Generally Available). We're targeting the end of September for the go live date, and it will likely be mid-October before automated validation can run validation on manifests with dependencies. |
@denelon I still fail to see why a x64 program manifest requiring a x86 dependency is currently flagged as a problem? (AFAICT #1665 is about manifests requiring a specific dependency architecture (and I assume that the main manifest is x86-only?!), where the dependency is available on more than one architecture. So this doesn't apply here. There is only one dependency architecture available, namely x86 - which runs perfectly fine with the main x64 program.) |
We've encountered some interesting scenarios for installers that are x86 (for compatibility reasons) that install x64 versions of software, and which architectures should be used for dependencies. This is slightly compounded by cases where an emulated version of a dependency is running on different hardware. WinGet attempts to pick the best version of a package to install. Sometimes WinGet may not pick the "best" choice. We don't test every permutation for which installer and dependency combination might get selected. "It works on my machine™️" can cause problems. I was just trying to loop some of the related topics together. The challenges may not apply to this package, but I know they do for some other packages. We will start wiring up the dependency validation logic in production after the WinGet 1.6 client goes out stable. There will be plenty of older PRs that will get triggered, and hopefully, most of them will pass validation. |
winget validate --manifest <path>
?winget install --manifest <path>
?Note:
<path>
is the name of the directory containing the manifest you're submitting.Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow