-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
Project deppending on other project not compiling after switching to main #526
Comments
Thanks for pointing this out. It is likely an error introduced in the I suggest trying to run the action again using the |
Okay, so I have just made a test in this draft Pull Request. At first, I set both uses of cmake action (one in the main workflow and another in a composite action) to use
Then, I reverted the version in the main workflow to
Indeed, it looks like in Note: it also uses cmake from the PATH instead of specifying the full path to it, but that does not seem to be causing any issues, and I'll leave it up to you to choose which one of the two behaviours (absolte path vs PATH variable) is the preferred one. |
Right, the issue seems to be caused by the action incorrectly parsing the command-line arguments. I'll probably need to write my own function for handling arguments with quotes instead of relying on an external library. |
@MartinSalinas98 try this branch: |
Seems to work fine:
|
I collaborate in some C++ projects, and, in one of them, we are recently experienciing compilation issues since we switched the
cmake-action
we use from versionv2.0.0
tomain
.The issue affects this repository, which deppends on this other one.
To discover this issue, we created this pull request.
The "parent" project can compile with no issues, but the "child" one errors out with this error:
As stated before, this error only occurs selecting
cmake-action
in branchmain
, but works fine inv2.0.0
.Is there anything that gets set differently in the tags when they get generated for release that makes it necessary to use a tag always, or could it be a bug introduced post 2.0.0?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: