Mosè Giordano
Mosè Giordano
With a build from this PR I get ``` julia> Base.parse_image_targets(Base.parse_cache_header("share/julia/compiled/v1.12/Pkg/tUTdb_fyEGR.ji")[7]) 1-element Vector{Base.ImageTarget}: generic; flags=0; features_en=(cx16) ``` which seems to suggest `JULIA_CPU_TARGET` is still not being effectively propagated where needed?
Looks like this PR bitrot in the meantime?
Is this PR good to go now?
Does this need a test?
Especially since there have been multiple pushes after the pull request was accepted, showing that (1) that version wasn't ready and (2) there are no tests making sure the code...
Ah, the test checking #54054 already exists, but no one noticed it because aarch64-linux-gnu is allowed to fail (and it has been failing for way too long).
Note that [our fork of libuv](https://github.com/JuliaLang/libuv/tree/ca3a5a431a1c37859b6508e6b2a288092337029a) doesn't currently included https://github.com/libuv/libuv/pull/4278, which was merged a couple of weeks after our fork was last synced with upstream. We will have to wait...
> Would a PR switching to using that be potentially accepted? Based on [this comment](https://github.com/libuv/libuv/pull/3499#issuecomment-1054502510), probably yes (but note again that our libuv doesn't contain the fix for cgroups)
This will stop working at some point. We need to move to `codecov/codecov-action@v3` and an admin of this repo to set up a codecov token.
My point is that `codecov/codecov-action@v3` will stop working when Nodejs v16 will be retired in github actions in a few months. We can go on with this PR right now,...