-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
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
Using python env from within gives warnings. #364
Comments
Why is the sis_command a python that lives in the setup? |
Because I was working on a setup intended for non-i6 usage... for example if you use PyCharm to open a project and create an env, it will use |
Maybe the warning is actually to strict.. maybe it should only check alias, config, output, recipe and work? |
I'd say the warning is fine. The hashes of your jobs should never depend on the location of your setup. Another solution to hash_overwrite would be to make the path relative, i.e. change:
to
(even though this changes the hashes, what may be fine since nobody had a setup like this before) |
I think there is a misunderstanding here. In this case it is not about the hashes. The warning comes because the util function has a fallback to the SIS_COMMAND entry, but it is only used from within the Jobs init function, so nothing is hashed. The SIS_COMMAND itself should have no effect on the setup results, so this is why I thought adding e.g. a I do not see why having a |
I do not like this, as there could be invisible problems when the fallback python is used and then changes somehow. In your case I understand the problem is in fact that your (independently created) venv folder is in the root dir of the setup. The warning is only intended to come if your created Path is created by the current setup (which it isn't here) so I tend to agree with Chris:
So how to resolve that:
|
Okay, then lets go for option 3 |
ok, after discussion in rwth-i6/sisyphus#127 I see, why option 3 is not desirable. In this light I might take back (or reduce) my reservation against option 2 ("hash overwrite") Based on the code complexity I thing I might prefer option 2 now. Any thoughts on that from this community? |
When using python from within a sisyphus dir, there are warnings triggered by line: https://github.com/rwth-i6/i6_core/blob/main/util.py#L375
Which is e.g.:
Caused by the changes in #261
One way to suppress this message is to use a
hash_overwrite
... any other ideas?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: