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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add aarch64/arm64 to CI #1036

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2025
Merged

Add aarch64/arm64 to CI #1036

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 5, 2025

Conversation

NickeZ
Copy link
Contributor

@NickeZ NickeZ commented Jan 3, 2025 •
edited
Loading

fixes #1032

This is a proof of concept to build and test arm64 executables. If this concept is acceptable then I would like to refactor to a "strategy matrix" build.

edit: The last build in my repo is successful: https://github.com/NickeZ/cbindgen/actions/runs/12596962803/job/35109043466, so hopefully this rebased version also works.

emilio
emilio reviewed Jan 3, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@emilio emilio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks reasonable at a glance, yeah, but using a matrix would be better indeed.

@NickeZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

NickeZ commented Jan 3, 2025

Looks reasonable at a glance, yeah, but using a matrix would be better indeed.

Would you mind approving the ci job to run?

@emilio
Copy link
Collaborator

emilio commented Jan 3, 2025

Gah, for some reason I was enrolled on some github experiment that didn't show the "approve and run" button.

@emilio
Copy link
Collaborator

emilio commented Jan 3, 2025

Seems somewhat known given the discussion in https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/143787.

@NickeZ
Refactor arm64 build to matrix strategy
9bdf01b 
Github is gradually moving ubuntu-latest to ubuntu-24.04 and the apt
sources look slightly different. My fork and upstream ends up having
different "ubuntu-latest", so I pin it to 24.
@NickeZ NickeZ force-pushed the nickez/build-arm64 branch from 062a6c4 to 9bdf01b Compare January 4, 2025 00:33
@NickeZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

NickeZ commented Jan 4, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Do you prefer that I squash the commits or not?

ps. Github also "screwed" me over, in my fork I get ubuntu-24, whereas here we have ubuntu-22 when we specify ubuntu-latest...

emilio
emilio approved these changes Jan 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@emilio emilio 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 great. I'm a bit unsure about how reliable the cross-arch sources.list stuff is, it seems ideally it shouldn't be needed? But alas, let's try this.

@emilio emilio added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 5, 2025
Merged via the queue into mozilla:master with commit e82815e Jan 5, 2025
3 checks passed
@NickeZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

NickeZ commented Jan 7, 2025

The official repos don't have arm64 and the Ubuntu docker images uses ports.ubuntu.com, so I hope it is maintained.

I tried using "cross" package as well for libc. But then I had issues running the tests that call executables. I guess std::process doesn't work with binfmt or something.

One option would be to call all binary tests with "CARGO_..._RUNNER" if available.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@emilio emilio emilio approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Adding arm64 builds in releases?
2 participants
@NickeZ @emilio