Closed pat-s closed 2 months ago
Thanks! Have you thought about just adding rhel
to the table in sysreqs2.R
? I am a bit worried that we miss this conversion in the future. rhel
is what the table should have used in the first place.
I thought about it but this would then be a breaking change as some users might have already hardcoded redhat
or redhat-9
meanwhile to make the platform detection work.
Another option would be to have both for a while and then deprecate the old one. Your choice.
Yeah, I meant keeping redhat
and adding rhel
.
Ah yeah, you said adding not replacing.
I'll change it then and add rhel
. The version splitting might still be required?
Thanks! I simplified it a bit and removed the extra logic.
Ah, I was under the impression that the version needs to resolve to only a single digit for the major version but apparently some fuzzy matching is happening in the background 🙃
Thanks for cleaning up and merging so quickly!
https://github.com/r-lib/pak/issues/610
Can likely be done more elegantly but should go into the right direction and move things forward.
RHEL is reported as follows
Given that all RH-related sysdep mappings are referenced as
"redhat"
, rewriting the respective internal mappings made most sense to me.This change results in the following
Given that
"redhat-8"
and"redhat-9"
already work as desired when handed over manually, this change should align the platform parsing for the moment. There might be other parts that need to be touched in addition, you might know best.