Skip to content
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

Some pin_run_as_build pins are stricter than run_exports #1392

Open
isuruf opened this issue Mar 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Some pin_run_as_build pins are stricter than run_exports #1392

isuruf opened this issue Mar 29, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@isuruf
Copy link
Member

isuruf commented Mar 29, 2021

If the pin_run_as_build needs to be relaxed, we need to,

  1. Hotfix the packages. eg: Fix expat pin to match run_exports conda-forge-repodata-patches-feedstock#132
  2. Remove the pin_run_as_build or relax it.

There might be quite a few. I looked at the first one which is arpack and it needs to be fixed.

cc @ocefpaf, @beckermr

@beckermr
Copy link
Member

Thanks for making this issue! We should I think prefer to remove pin_run_as_build as opposed to relaxing it so that we can centralize all ABI constraints around the run_exports themselves. Does this sound right?

If yes, then we may need to add run exports for older builds of pinned packages IIUIC.

@isuruf
Copy link
Member Author

isuruf commented Mar 29, 2021

We should I think prefer to remove pin_run_as_build as opposed to relaxing it so that we can centralize all ABI constraints around the run_exports themselves. Does this sound right?

I think that's a related, but different issue.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants