-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.2k
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
Upgrade build SDK to 5.0 preview8 #22227
Conversation
a229330
to
3cc32b6
Compare
@Pilchie for approval. |
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ | |||
<ItemGroup> | |||
<PackageReference Include="StyleCop.Analyzers" Version="1.1.118" PrivateAssets="All" /> | |||
<PackageReference Include="Microsoft.Azure.Cosmos" Version="3.12.0" /> | |||
<PackageReference Include="Microsoft.Azure.Cosmos.Direct" Version="3.11.4" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Filed #22231
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does it compile from commandline without this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No 😞
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | |||
<Project> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Filed #22230
@@ -33,30 +31,5 @@ public void OperationException_exposes_public_string_and_inner_exception_constru | |||
Assert.Equal("Foo", ex.Message); | |||
Assert.Same(inner, ex.InnerException); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
[ConditionalFact] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tried using "recommended approach" as per release notes and JSON serializer. It did not work since we are create ad-hoc exception (rather than actual one being thrown which would have stack trace and other data).
If we should have these then I can file an issue to add them again.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
File an issue to discuss
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems fine to remove them. It will also stop us being noise when people search for code using BinaryFormatter. 🙃
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
global.json
Outdated
"runtimes": { | ||
"dotnet": [ | ||
"3.1.6" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Upgrade to 3.1.7 and remove aspnetcore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Design/SqlServer.Tests/CrossStore failed without aspnetcore on netcoreapp3.1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
☹ One of these days...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just curious, what was the error here? Why do we still need aspnetcore?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It was not possible to find any compatible framework version
The framework 'Microsoft.AspNetCore.App', version '3.1.0' was not found.
- The following frameworks were found:
5.0.0-preview.8.20414.8 at [F:\workspace\_work\1\s\.dotnet\shared\Microsoft.AspNetCore.App]
You can resolve the problem by installing the specified framework and/or SDK.
The specified framework can be found at:
- https://aka.ms/dotnet-core-applaunch?framework=Microsoft.AspNetCore.App&framework_version=3.1.0&arch=x64&rid=win10-x64
=== COMMAND LINE ===
"F:\workspace\_work\1\s\.dotnet\dotnet.exe" exec --depsfile "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\bin\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests\Release\netcoreapp3.1\Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.SqlServer.Tests.deps.json" --runtimeconfig "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\bin\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests\Release\netcoreapp3.1\Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.SqlServer.Tests.runtimeconfig.json" "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\.packages\xunit.runner.console/2.4.1/tools/netcoreapp2.0/xunit.console.dll" "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\bin\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests\Release\netcoreapp3.1\Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.SqlServer.Tests.dll" -noautoreporters -xml "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\TestResults\Release\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests_netcoreapp3.1_x64.xml" -html "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\TestResults\Release\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests_netcoreapp3.1_x64.html" > "F:\workspace\_work\1\s\artifacts\log\Release\EFCore.SqlServer.Tests_netcoreapp3.1_x64.log" 2>&1
I tried to do cursory analysis, what are we using but log did not indicate anything specific.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The SDK eagerly requires Microsoft.AspNetCore.App. There are workarounds to avoid it in other repos. I think a fix went in for it recently...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
5dbb3c4
to
cb963b3
Compare
cb963b3
to
29a0753
Compare
Approved for RC1. |
This appears to have broken the signing validation stages in the official build: https://dev.azure.com/dnceng/internal/_build/results?buildId=789168&view=logs&j=0a6c679f-72be-5867-422e-acb741a068a3&t=d8e44ddf-8ea2-5518-25e7-4300471a271a This is because the hosted pool machines don't have 16.8 These signing validations still exist in the official build of efcore because this repo won't be on the critical path post-build, and so the validation stages were allowed to remain for convenience (same goes for tests, as none of the other repos run tests in their official builds). Solutions for this:
/cc @dotnet/dnceng @markwilkie |
We're telling customers they need 16.8 for .NET 5 preview 8. Shouldn't we be building/testing with it?
We found several issues moving to preview 8 that we now need to investigate. Delaying this change further doesn't seem wise since customers already have preview 8 in their hands.
If this means switching to not testing what we actually ship, then I'm not in favor. But the only way we can ship something is if we don't test that thing, then so be it.
Daily builds are the most important to us. As long as we are still getting daily builds of main, then this is fine. |
I think it's worth keeping preview8 here. This is not about anything but the validation jobs, which run after the build has completed (prior to publishing). They're really just running signtool and a couple other random tools (like policheck). I don't think that running these on 16.8 has any added value. Btw, EFCore is actually using VS2017 machines for its build. I think this only hits because some of the validation stages need desktop msbuild (e.g. when they use microbuild to do a signing check)
Right now, the version of efcore in RC 1 is basically blocked from updating. main appears to still be fine. |
Only till release/5.0 is not merged to main. Which @ajcvickers does every morning I believe. |
Do you all have a preference for what we do here? I am thinking to onboard to the post-build validation stages is the best path. |
No validation is lost by doing that, and also has the advantage of being the easiest fix. I also think it's the best path here. |
I tend to agree. |
Assuming I understand correctly, then I'm fine with this. |
No description provided.