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

Add architecture ppc64le to travis build #44

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

zazzel
Copy link

@zazzel zazzel commented Dec 10, 2020

Hi,
I had added ppc64le support on Travis-ci and Its been success added and build. Kindly review and merge same.

Changes done are added ppc64le arch.

The Travis ci build logs can be verified from the link below.
https://travis-ci.com/github/zazzel/js-deep-for-each
Please have a look.

Thank you

Add architecture ppc64le to travis build
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 10, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #44 (fc7e907) into master (5f929ff) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##            master       #44   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            1         1           
  Lines           13        13           
  Branches         4         4           
=========================================
  Hits            13        13           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f929ff...fc7e907. Read the comment docs.

@acostalima
Copy link
Contributor

acostalima commented Dec 14, 2020

If the pipeline runs to completion faster on ppc64le than amd64 today as claimed, I don't really mind merging this. We can even drop amd64 for the time being, I guess. However, even though ppc64le is supposed to benefit from faster boot times, the last run of the pipeline took longer than amd64.

@satazor, thoughts? We're in the process of moving the CI to GitHub Actions anyhow.

Background:

@acostalima acostalima requested a review from satazor December 14, 2020 21:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants