-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 640
[not for merge] Test a change for #3439 #3440
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
[not for merge] Test a change for #3439 #3440
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @shayanhoshyari, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request refactors the handling of runfiles within Python virtual environments by removing the Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
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.
Code Review
This pull request refactors the venv creation logic to simplify how symlinks are created. It removes the usage of runfiles.symlinks and unifies the handling of files and directories by using ctx.actions.declare_symlink for all cases. This is a good simplification. However, I've found a critical issue in the new implementation where the target path for file symlinks is not correctly calculated relative to the runfiles root, which will likely cause broken symlinks. I've provided a suggestion to fix this.
ff56c1d to
f48fdc0
Compare
rickeylev
left a comment
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.
Per discussion in 3439, we have to keep the runfiles.symlinks logic for performance reasons.
| venv_files.append(venv_link) | ||
| # Just for demonstration purposes, | ||
| # there is definitely a better thing to do upstream that removeprefix("../") | ||
| link_to_path = link_to.short_path.removeprefix("../") if is_file(link_to) else link_to |
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.
If you want to carry a patch, then I suggest calling runfiles_root_path, something like this:
link_to = runfiles_root_path(ctx, link_to.short_path) if is_file(link_to) else link_to
The case not being handled is if the File being mapped into the venv is coming from the main repository. In that case, short_path is foo/bar.txt, but the runfiles root path is e.g. _main/foo/bar.txt. Most things that go into the venv come from external repos, so you rarely see entries without ../ in their short path.
+1 |
Experiment for #3439