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

update Java 1.8 wrapper to 1.8.0_311 for x86_64 #14644

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2022

Conversation

boegel
Copy link
Member

@boegel boegel commented Jan 3, 2022

(created using eb --new-pr)

@boegel boegel added the update label Jan 3, 2022
@boegel boegel added this to the next release (4.5.2?) milestone Jan 3, 2022
@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Jan 3, 2022

@boegelbot please test @ generoso

@verdurin
Copy link
Member

verdurin commented Jan 3, 2022

Test report by @verdurin
FAILED
Build succeeded for 0 out of 1 (2 easyconfigs in total)
centos7.lan - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel Core Processor (Skylake, IBRS), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/fd4111a16d6312c7f136d79fa0705878 for a full test report.

@migueldiascosta
Copy link
Member

the latest version seems to be 311, is there a reason to use 301?

@verdurin
Copy link
Member

verdurin commented Jan 3, 2022

Yes, was just going to say the same thing - I downloaded 311, which is why my test failed.

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Jan 3, 2022

the latest version seems to be 311, is there a reason to use 301?

Ugh, I only looked at the archive page, not the current versions... 🤦

@boegel boegel force-pushed the 20220103121535_new_pr_Java18 branch from 48a4002 to 8f4396c Compare January 3, 2022 15:56
@boegel boegel changed the title update Java 1.8 wrapper to 1.8.0_301 for x86_64 update Java 1.8 wrapper to 1.8.0_311 for x86_64 Jan 3, 2022
@easybuilders easybuilders deleted a comment from boegelbot Jan 3, 2022
@easybuilders easybuilders deleted a comment from boegelbot Jan 3, 2022
@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on login1

PR test command 'EB_PR=14644 EB_ARGS= /opt/software/slurm/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_14644 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

  • exit code: 0
  • output:
Submitted batch job 7598

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 1004028073 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test report by @boegelbot
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total)
cns1 - Linux rocky linux 8.4, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/a7d058c428afb0a8af6e57309442df35 for a full test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Jan 3, 2022

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total)
node3127.skitty.os - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz (skylake_avx512), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/cbc81460a69012e420864220d6f4580a for a full test report.

@branfosj
Copy link
Member

branfosj commented Jan 3, 2022

Test report by @branfosj
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (2 easyconfigs in total)
bear-pg0211u03a.bear.cluster - Linux RHEL 8.5, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6248 CPU @ 2.50GHz (cascadelake), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/09acd70a30f7fb0df7de9e2bc95a55c9 for a full test report.

Copy link
Member

@branfosj branfosj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@branfosj
Copy link
Member

branfosj commented Jan 3, 2022

Going in, thanks @boegel!

@branfosj branfosj merged commit de7d355 into easybuilders:develop Jan 3, 2022
@boegel boegel deleted the 20220103121535_new_pr_Java18 branch January 3, 2022 19:43
@boegel boegel added the change label Jan 5, 2022
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.

5 participants