-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 310
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
handle more RAPIDS version formats in update-version.sh, refactor dependencies.yaml #4109
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Approving with one small suggestion.
This CI failure:
Should hopefully be fixed by rapidsai/raft#2135 |
I just pulled latest |
ah looks like @jakirkham noticed the same thing on #4127. Let's get that one passing and merged first, then update this one. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, although I didn't verify the regexes in the sed calls work so I'm assuming that was tested.
That PR is now merged. So we should be good to update here |
Thanks @jakirkham , I've updated this to the latest |
Thanks James! 🙏 Looks like we are seeing some test failures with CUDA 12 wheels. Not sure if they are related to this change |
I think the Python test failures could be related to pandas 2 changes in cudf. There are lots of separate failure cases. |
Python failures should be fixed when #4144 merges |
/merge |
Description
Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#13.
Updates
update-version.sh
to correctly handle RAPIDS dependencies likecudf-cu12==24.2.*
.This also pulls in some dependency refactoring originally added in #4088, which allows greater use of dependencies.yaml globs (and therefore less maintenance effort to support new CUDA versions).
Checklist
How I tested this
The portability of this updated
sed
command was tested here: rapidsai/cudf#14825 (comment).In this repo, I ran the following:
Confirmed that that first
git diff
changed all the things I expected, and that second one showed 0 changes.