bazelbuild / bazelbuild/bazel-toolchains

Toolchain 4.1.0 release doesn't have a version mapping for Bazel 4.1.0

Open
#964 0 comments 1 reaction 0 assignees View on GitHub
Dominant language
Go
Stars
202
Forks
100
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

The `_BAZEL_TO_CONFIG_SPEC_NAMES` definition doesn't include it:

```
_BAZEL_TO_CONFIG_SPEC_NAMES = {"0.20.0": ["8.0.0"], "0.21.0": ["8.0.0"], "0.22.0": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.0": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.1": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.2": ["9.0.0"], "0.24.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.24.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.2": ["9.0.0"], "0.26.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.26.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.27.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.27.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.28.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.28.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.29.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.29.1": ["9.0.0", "10.0.0"], "1.0.0": ["9.0.0", "10.0.0"], "1.0.1": ["10.0.0"], "1.1.0": ["10.0.0"], "1.2.0": ["10.0.0"], "1.2.1": ["10.0.0"], "2.0.0": ["10.0.0"], "2.1.0": ["10.0.0"], "2.1.1": ["10.0.0", "11.0.0"], "2.2.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.0.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.1.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.2.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.3.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.3.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.4.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.5.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.5.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.6.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.2": ["11.0.0"], "4.0.0": ["11.0.0"]}
```

bazel build log:

```
Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: 6a792f82-ce85-4fbe-a3e0-086807ec6e33
DEBUG: /var/home/pedro/.cache/bazel/_bazel_pedro/5a046362f6c901e6a5e82a0d029b1f96/external/bazel_toolchains/rules/rbe_repo/version_check.bzl:68:14:
Current running Bazel is ahead of bazel-toolchains repo. Please update your pin to bazel-toolchains repo in your WORKSPACE file.
DEBUG: /var/home/pedro/.cache/bazel/_bazel_pedro/5a046362f6c901e6a5e82a0d029b1f96/external/bazel_toolchains/rules/rbe_repo/checked_in.bzl:125:14: rbe_default not using checked in configs; Bazel version 4.1.0 was picked/selected but no checked in config was found in map {"0.20.0": ["8.0.0"], "0.21.0": ["8.0.0"], "0.22.0": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.0": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.1": ["8.0.0", "9.0.0"], "0.23.2": ["9.0.0"], "0.24.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.24.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.25.2": ["9.0.0"], "0.26.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.26.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.27.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.27.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.28.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.28.1": ["9.0.0"], "0.29.0": ["9.0.0"], "0.29.1": ["9.0.0", "10.0.0"], "1.0.0": ["9.0.0", "10.0.0"], "1.0.1": ["10.0.0"], "1.1.0": ["10.0.0"], "1.2.0": ["10.0.0"], "1.2.1": ["10.0.0"], "2.0.0": ["10.0.0"], "2.1.0": ["10.0.0"], "2.1.1": ["10.0.0", "11.0.0"], "2.2.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.0.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.1.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.2.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.3.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.3.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.4.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.5.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.5.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.6.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.0": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.1": ["11.0.0"], "3.7.2": ["11.0.0"], "4.0.0": ["11.0.0"]}
...
```

It ends up falling back to using docker to generate it, which I couldn't use on my environment.

Using Bazel `4.0.0` with this `4.1.0` toolchain just worked.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Research direction

Locate the _BAZEL_TO_CONFIG_SPEC_NAMES definition referenced in the issue and compare its handling of Bazel 4.0.0 and 4.1.0. Reproduce the reported Bazel build behavior, update the version mapping for 4.1.0, and verify that the build no longer falls back to Docker for a checked-in configuration.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
build-system
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
2/5
Estimated time
1-3 hours
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Clearly specified
Newbie friendliness
55/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.