You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is this expected behaviour? I had expected (from my very limited exposure to this tool) that all these paths were in "Go package path" format, rather than being filesystem paths.
I only worked out what was going on when I noticed that the prefix being looked up is defined with filepath.Rel, and perhaps filepath.ToSlash should be used on the result before further processing? Or perhaps that would also be surprising for packages defined on the filesystem. (I don't know if Go enforces /-separators in that case or not.)
This is with protobuild 6b023c6, rather than 0.1.0, due to #46.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Protobuild was assuming that canonicalized relative file paths and
Go import paths are the same. This is not true on Windows where
the former uses `\` but the latter uses (as like other OSes) `/`.
This change fixes the issue and adds some tests around the
implementation to prevent regressions.
Fixescontainerd#47.
Signed-off-by: Kazuyoshi Kato <katokazu@amazon.com>
While trying to regenerate protobuf in hcsshim, I hit a surprising behaviour.
I was running this on Windows, and
was not honouring the existing override in Protobuf.toml:
After much poking about, I found this works:
Is this expected behaviour? I had expected (from my very limited exposure to this tool) that all these paths were in "Go package path" format, rather than being filesystem paths.
I only worked out what was going on when I noticed that the prefix being looked up is defined with
filepath.Rel
, and perhapsfilepath.ToSlash
should be used on the result before further processing? Or perhaps that would also be surprising for packages defined on the filesystem. (I don't know if Go enforces/
-separators in that case or not.)This is with protobuild 6b023c6, rather than 0.1.0, due to #46.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: