You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If I call that macro in the Bazel package //tools then the file in the archive is put at data/tools/foo.txt. If I call the same macro in the Bazel package //data then the file in the archive is data/foo.txt with rules_pkg 1.0.1, and data/data/foo.txt with rules_pkg 0.9.1.
I expect the 0.9.1 behavior. Any ideas on workarounds to prevent package_dir from being stripped in 1.0.1?
Minimal reproducible example here: https://github.com/sloretz/rules_pkg_package_dir
Our codebase has a macro that calls
pkg_tar
withstrip_prefix
andpackage_dir
set to hardcoded values, sort of like this:If I call that macro in the Bazel package
//tools
then the file in the archive is put atdata/tools/foo.txt
. If I call the same macro in the Bazel package//data
then the file in the archive isdata/foo.txt
with rules_pkg1.0.1
, anddata/data/foo.txt
with rules_pkg0.9.1
.I expect the
0.9.1
behavior. Any ideas on workarounds to preventpackage_dir
from being stripped in1.0.1
?Possibly caused by #749?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: