sikkienl/dash

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/dashpay/dash.git synced 2024-12-26 12:32:48 +01:00

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
UdjinM6	c51ba63646	ci: more checksums in guix workflow (#5417 ) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented 1. not all binaries were covered with checksums 2. there were no checksums for archives ## What was done? add missing checksums, also group and sort them ## How Has This Been Tested? run commands after local guix build see this PR results ## Breaking Changes n/a ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_	2023-06-09 13:19:01 -05:00
UdjinM6	49ca1aa5db	ci: use PR's HEAD in guix workflow (#5416 ) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Our guix workflow creates a merge commit instead of using HEAD from a PR itself which is why commit hash is different. That's exactly what is described in https://github.com/actions/checkout/issues/27 imo. related: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5355#issuecomment-1578459628 ## What was done? adjust guix workflow ## How Has This Been Tested? see this PR results: the HEAD looks correct now this PR: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/actions/runs/5191152453/jobs/9358590629?pr=5416#step:2:482 #5355: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/actions/runs/5187698039/jobs/9350381761?pr=5355#step:2:489 ## Breaking Changes n/a hopefully ## Checklist: - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_	2023-06-07 06:30:12 +03:00
PastaPastaPasta	16187c7670	ci: implement guix build by label request in CI (#5368 ) ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented Automated guix builds in CI when specifically requested ## What was done? Any PR with the `build-guix` label added will automatically have the Guix build ran and the hashes placed in the CI output to compare against ## How Has This Been Tested? This PR ## Breaking Changes None ## Checklist: _Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes that apply._ - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_	2023-05-15 22:15:34 -05:00

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

UdjinM6

c51ba63646

ci: more checksums in guix workflow (#5417 )

## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. not all binaries were covered with checksums
2. there were no checksums for archives

## What was done?
add missing checksums, also group and sort them

## How Has This Been Tested?
run commands after local guix build
see this PR results

## Breaking Changes
n/a

## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_

2023-06-09 13:19:01 -05:00

UdjinM6

49ca1aa5db

ci: use PR's HEAD in guix workflow (#5416 )

## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Our guix workflow creates a merge commit instead of using HEAD from a PR
itself which is why commit hash is different. That's exactly what is
described in https://github.com/actions/checkout/issues/27 imo.

related:
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5355#issuecomment-1578459628

## What was done?
adjust guix workflow

## How Has This Been Tested?
see this PR results: the HEAD looks correct now
this PR:
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/actions/runs/5191152453/jobs/9358590629?pr=5416#step:2:482
#5355:
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/actions/runs/5187698039/jobs/9350381761?pr=5355#step:2:489

## Breaking Changes
n/a hopefully 

## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_

2023-06-07 06:30:12 +03:00

PastaPastaPasta

16187c7670

ci: implement guix build by label request in CI (#5368 )

## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Automated guix builds in CI when specifically requested 

## What was done?
Any PR with the `build-guix` label added will automatically have the
Guix build ran and the hashes placed in the CI output to compare against


## How Has This Been Tested?
This PR

## Breaking Changes
None

## Checklist:
_Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes that
apply._
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_

2023-05-15 22:15:34 -05:00

3 Commits