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

Multi arch support #357

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 4, 2025
Merged

Conversation

pacostas
Copy link
Contributor

@pacostas pacostas commented Feb 11, 2025

Merge After

Summary

This PR does two things:

Use Cases

Checklist

  • I have viewed, signed, and submitted the Contributor License Agreement.
  • I have linked issue(s) that this PR should close using keywords or the Github UI (See docs)
  • I have added an integration test, if necessary.
  • I have reviewed the styleguide for guidance on my code quality.
  • I'm happy with the commit history on this PR (I have rebased/squashed as needed).

Sorry, something went wrong.

@pacostas pacostas requested a review from a team as a code owner February 11, 2025 15:11
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Feb 11, 2025

CLA Signed

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

@pacostas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ForestEckhardt I updated freezer, rebased branch. Is ready for review :)

@modulo11
Copy link
Contributor

modulo11 commented Mar 4, 2025

LGTM, can you rebase the branch and check if the changes to matchers/have_file_test.go and matchers/have_file_with_content_test.go are still required? After the latest PRs this should be obsolete.

@pacostas pacostas force-pushed the multi-arch-support branch from 2fad871 to cb8fb1b Compare March 4, 2025 15:14
pacostas added 3 commits March 4, 2025 16:24
feat: multi-arch support for generating multi-arch directories
@pacostas pacostas force-pushed the multi-arch-support branch from cb8fb1b to 466a877 Compare March 4, 2025 15:24
@pacostas
Copy link
Contributor Author

pacostas commented Mar 4, 2025

@modulo11 thank you, i removed them and the tests are passing

@pacostas
Copy link
Contributor Author

pacostas commented Mar 4, 2025

@ForestEckhardt I think this PR is ready for review/merge

@robdimsdale robdimsdale added the semver:minor A change requiring a minor version bump label Mar 4, 2025
Copy link
Member

@robdimsdale robdimsdale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@@ -29,16 +29,15 @@ func testBuildpackStore(t *testing.T, when spec.G, it spec.S) {
fakeCacheManager = &fakes.CacheManager{}

buildpackStore = occam.NewBuildpackStore()

buildpackStore = buildpackStore.WithLocalFetcher(fakeLocalFetcher).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we needed to remove this - we could have kept it here, and later on we could have done buildpackStore = buildpackStore.WithTarget(). It would only override it for the specific tests that require it.

However, i think either option is fine, so no need to revert your changes.

@robdimsdale robdimsdale merged commit 17405e7 into paketo-buildpacks:main Mar 4, 2025
7 of 8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
semver:minor A change requiring a minor version bump
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants