Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

TST: Do not create symbolic link named gfortran. #15574

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2020

Conversation

charris
Copy link
Member

@charris charris commented Feb 15, 2020

Apparently gfortran has been preinstalled for azure-pipeline Mac testing since February 13, 2020, so do not try to link our fortran version to the same name as it causes an error.

@mattip
Copy link
Member

mattip commented Feb 15, 2020

@charris looks like this worked, do you want to remove the WIP?

@charris
Copy link
Member Author

charris commented Feb 15, 2020

Heh, how about that, looks like gfortran comes preinstalled. Let me check that something else didn't change, from the comment gfortran was only needed for running the f2py tests, which I assume would be otherwise skipped.

@charris charris changed the title WIP: Do not link gfortran TST: Do not create symbolic link named gfortran. Feb 15, 2020
@mattip
Copy link
Member

mattip commented Feb 15, 2020

The comment needs updating, like "up to Feb 2020 the image did not include gfortran..."

@charris
Copy link
Member Author

charris commented Feb 15, 2020

@mattip I'll put this in in a bit if you don't.

@charris
Copy link
Member Author

charris commented Feb 15, 2020

Actually, let me comment the change first.

The gfortran link is preinstalled since Feb 13, 2020 and attempting to
create the link causes an error to be raised.
@mattip
Copy link
Member

mattip commented Feb 15, 2020

Merging even though travis did not finish, since the code in question is only active on azure. Thanks @charris. Do you know if azure does a merge-based run, or do we now have to rebase pull requests in order to get this in?

@charris
Copy link
Member Author

charris commented Feb 15, 2020

@mattip I have had mixed results with just restarting failed tests, but close/reopen is pretty reliable, if more resource heavy.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants