-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 538
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
Use rapids-build-backend #5804
Use rapids-build-backend #5804
Conversation
@KyleFromNVIDIA I'm going to merge the upstream into this PR to get a fresh CI run. This is the only open PR targeting 24.06 and it's a good candidate to look at. I want to investigate the latest CI failures, which @rjzamora indicated may be related to dask-expr. I'll compare its failures to those on #5815. |
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.
This looks good to me, and I think it's ready to merge. Those failing test jobs are optional, and the failures are unrelated to this PR's changes.
Those 3 failing
This PR looks like it has all the changes we want for the |
/merge |
Oh interesting, I see this now
Even though I don't see those groups in the list of reviewers. I guess the groups were dropped because @bdice and @vyasr are a part of them and left earlier reviews "on behalf of" those groups. |
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 a few minor alignment questions -- we'd like the build scripts to look as identical as possible across RAPIDS.
ci/build_python.sh
Outdated
version=$(rapids-generate-version) | ||
git_commit=$(git rev-parse HEAD) | ||
export RAPIDS_PACKAGE_VERSION=${version} |
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.
We changed up how this works for some other packages, to something like rapids-generate-version > ./VERSION
. Does this need a similar change?
e.g. https://github.com/rapidsai/cudf/blob/branch-24.08/ci/build_python.sh
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.
Yes I think so, you're right. I'll change that here.
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 just pushed 29911b6 doing that.
Made a similar change in build_cpp.sh
as well (which doesn't need the version to be written to the VERSION
file).
Co-authored-by: Bradley Dice <bdice@bradleydice.com>
Co-authored-by: Bradley Dice <bdice@bradleydice.com>
The
I believe the root cause is bugs from rapidsai/raft#2331, not caught in CI because of rapidsai/raft#2348, which should be fixed by some combination of rapidsai/raft#2349 and rapidsai/raft#2347. |
The only failing tests here are the optional I'm confident this can be merged. |
/merge |
… followup (#5928) Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#31 Contributes to rapidsai/dependency-file-generator#89 #5804 was one of the earlier `rapids-build-backend` PRs merged across RAPIDS. Since it was merged, we've made some small adjustments to the approach for `rapids-build-backend`. This catches `cuml` up with those changes: * removes unused constants in `ci/build*` scripts * uses `--file-key` instead of `--file_key` in `rapids-dependency-file-generator` calls * uses `--prepend-channel` instead of `--prepend-channels` in `rapids-dependency-file-generator` calls * ensures `ci/update-version.sh` preserves alpha specs Authors: - James Lamb (https://github.com/jameslamb) Approvers: - Ray Douglass (https://github.com/raydouglass) URL: #5928
Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#31.