Skip to content
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

workflow: Actually temporarily skip the s390x e2e tests #2191

Conversation

stevenhorsman
Copy link
Member

I realised too late that adding a false to a list of or's does nothing. I wanted to preserve the code, but we can just revert, so it was pointless. Sorry!

I realised too late that adding a `false` to a list of or's does
nothing. I wanted to preserve the code, but we can just revert, so
it was pointless. Sorry!

Signed-off-by: stevenhorsman <[email protected]>
@stevenhorsman stevenhorsman added the CI Issues related to CI workflows label Dec 5, 2024
@stevenhorsman stevenhorsman requested a review from a team as a code owner December 5, 2024 14:51
@@ -266,12 +266,7 @@ jobs:
libvirt_s390x:
name: E2E tests on libvirt for the s390x architecture
# Skip s390x e2e tests until Choi is available to set-up the s390x runner's pre-action properly. Then revert this.
if: |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

my bad, I reviewed and merged the previous PR without realizing that.

Here you want use 'false &&' to preserve the entire block. Whatever you prefer, I will ack regardless.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, false && was what I should have done originally, but I'm not taking any chance this time!

@stevenhorsman stevenhorsman merged commit abb6b3a into confidential-containers:main Dec 5, 2024
22 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI Issues related to CI workflows
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants