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

Do not store absolute paths in contracts.json #430

Closed
pirapira opened this issue Jan 10, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #434
Closed

Do not store absolute paths in contracts.json #430

pirapira opened this issue Jan 10, 2019 · 2 comments · Fixed by #434

Comments

@pirapira
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, in contracts.json we see absolute paths like /home/yh/... but we we should not.

#414 was one attempt to fix this, but in a wrong way. #414 used the working directory of the process, and that caused f16c4e4#r31897816.

@pirapira
Copy link
Contributor Author

The correct fix would involve cd ing to the top of the package before calling solc with relative paths.

@pirapira
Copy link
Contributor Author

This will solve #408 .

pirapira added a commit to pirapira/raiden-contracts that referenced this issue Jan 10, 2019
contracts.json used to contain absolute paths because solc was called
with absolute paths. After this commit, contract_manager.py changes the
current directory to the top of raiden_contracts package and calls solc
with relative paths (it even comes back to the previous current
directory).

This fixes raiden-network#430
@loredanacirstea loredanacirstea added this to the Ithaca Testnet 02 milestone Jan 11, 2019
loredanacirstea pushed a commit to pirapira/raiden-contracts that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2019
contracts.json used to contain absolute paths because solc was called
with absolute paths. After this commit, contract_manager.py changes the
current directory to the top of raiden_contracts package and calls solc
with relative paths (it even comes back to the previous current
directory).

This fixes raiden-network#430
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants