folly
folly copied to clipboard
facebook
Support of Arch Linux in `getdeps.py`
I don't sure that I make all in accordance with the your contribution pipeline, so please correct me If there is needed.
So, I've made some changes to support the pacman package manager in your getdeps.py script. In manifests I'm also duplicated some packages from debs and rpms sections and create a new pps sections with according packages for pacman.
Issue: #1701
Hi @beryll1um!
Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community.
Action Required
In order to merge any pull request (code, docs, etc.), we require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have one on file for you.
Process
In order for us to review and merge your suggested changes, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA.
Once the CLA is signed, our tooling will perform checks and validations. Afterwards, the pull request will be tagged with CLA signed. The tagging process may take up to 1 hour after signing. Please give it that time before contacting us about it.
If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]. Thanks!
Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks!
@Orvid has imported this pull request. If you are a Meta employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.
Mostly look good but names could be a bit more explicit:
- Since "pacman" is also used by MinGW, could we use "arch-package" instead of "pacman-package"?
- Could we use "arch-packages" instead of "pps"? It seems unclear what "pps" means without reading the code.
Otherwise the change looks good to me. Thanks for fixing Arch issues!
Mostly look good but names could be a bit more explicit:
* Since "pacman" is also used by MinGW, could we use "arch-package" instead of "pacman-package"? * Could we use "arch-packages" instead of "pps"? It seems unclear what "pps" means without reading the code.Otherwise the change looks good to me. Thanks for fixing Arch issues!
Yes. I think your comments make sense. Will be changed.
@quark-zju, ping! Is it still relevant? Requested changes is already implemented.