c2patool: migrate to openssl@4#282112
Conversation
|
Need to figure out vendored OpenSSL |
|
I thought the current strategy to get everything into the staging branch and merge over? |
p-linnane
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@chenrui333 He's been taking care of ones with no dependents: #282103
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
Conflicts with new version bottle.. |
The staging branch is best used to migrate the largest connected component. For large migrations, it helps to calculate the connected components and migrate each independently. The more formulae that are modified in a separate branch, the worse the general workflow becomes as you will need to manually handle conflicts and version bumps. 0 dependents + no mixed OpenSSL dependencies in runtime tree should be possible to migrate separately. Also should be possible to handle small number of connected dependents if all are revision bumped together similar to how we've handled Python dependents. The main issue we want to avoid is mixed versions loaded by the same binary. When symbols in ABI overlap, then this can lead to crashes. We already check for this on macOS but Linux needs manual verification.
Dropping bottle commit and rebasing to re-run on new version. Looks like a workflow change will need to be fixed before continuing. |
|
🤖 An automated task has requested bottles to be published to this PR. Caution Please do not push to this PR branch before the bottle commits have been pushed, as this results in a state that is difficult to recover from. If you need to resolve a merge conflict, please use a merge commit. Do not force-push to this PR branch. |
HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>?brew test <formula>?brew audit --strict <formula>(after doingHOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>)? If this is a new formula, does it passbrew audit --new <formula>?