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

[3.11] gh-98548: Fix -ne shell operator spelling #98556

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 28, 2022

Conversation

sterliakov
Copy link
Contributor

gh-98548: Workflow not equal operator spelling

This shell operator should be spelled as -ne, not as -neq. All shell binary operators are two symbols long.

This bug is present on 3.10 and 3.11 branches only.

This follows #98555 for another affected branch.

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

Most changes to Python require a NEWS entry.

Please add it using the blurb_it web app or the blurb command-line tool.

Copy link
Contributor

@hauntsaninja hauntsaninja left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for spotting this!

Here is an example workflow run affected: https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/runs/3293756628/jobs/5430563962
That said, I'm not sure this is enough of a fix, because I think Github Actions runs with bash -e. So I think we'd never get to this anyway? One option would be to use || (echo ... ; exit 1) or something

@sterliakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

Since the command expected to fail is short enough, maybe just

if ! make check-abidump; then
    echo ...
fi

is sufficient? The if and until conditions are not considered failing for -e. Yes, gihub actions use set -e (or bash -e, not sure about this) to fail on first failing step.

@sterliakov sterliakov requested review from hauntsaninja and removed request for ezio-melotti October 24, 2022 10:09
Copy link
Contributor

@hauntsaninja hauntsaninja left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, this looks good to me. Want to update the 3.10 backport #98555 as well? :-) cc @JelleZijlstra

@sterliakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated #98555 too.

@ambv ambv merged commit 194588d into python:3.11 Oct 28, 2022
encukou pushed a commit to encukou/cpython that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Backport the workflow change and fix-ups:
- pythonGH-92442 (e89c01e)
- pythonGH-94129 (0dadb22)
- pythonGH-98556 (194588d)

Co-Authored-By: sterliakov <50529348+sterliakov@users.noreply.github.com>
Yhg1s pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 23, 2023
Backport the workflow change and fix-ups:
- GH-92442 (e89c01e)
- GH-94129 (0dadb22)
- GH-98556 (194588d)

Co-Authored-By: sterliakov <50529348+sterliakov@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Pablo Galindo Salgado <Pablogsal@gmail.com>
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.

6 participants