-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 118
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
Please bring back the lock file! #254
Comments
(Just linking #253 (comment) for connectivity.) |
It's fixed in |
Thank you for addressing this so quickly! |
Is this a common practice to rely on GH release archives? If you're building from source wouldn't you do a shallow clone of the repo for the given release tag instead? That would still have included the Just curious. I see that the releases include a source archive too, so I guess I can see how that's a problem, just a tad surprised why that'd be preferred vs cloning the repo by tag 🤔 |
Yes it is quite common. Tarballs are much easier to verify (checksums are a single command on a single file away). You certainly can validate a clone, but the most robust way to do this is to use |
dua-cli/.gitattributes
Line 1 in 2ef583d
This breaks distro packaging and reproducible builds. It's not the right solution, sorry. Just update the lock file to get fresh dependencies that work with Rust 1.80 and commit that. What happened with Rust 1.80 was an upstream snafu and not your fault, but this is quite unusual in the ecosystem and this breaks more things than it fixes.
A patch release with this dropped so people can just build out of the box again including
cargo build --release --locked
would be appreciated.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: