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

Fix errors while running publishSigned #7279

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 20, 2019

Conversation

smarter
Copy link
Member

@smarter smarter commented Sep 20, 2019

In 54266c1 I upgraded sbt-pgp from
1.1.0 to 2.0.0-M2, this changed the way signing was done: instead of
using the bouncycastle Java library, sbt-pgp now just calls gpg.
Unfortunately, it turns out that multiple parallel calls to gpg can lead
to the gpg-agent running out of memory, causing publishSigned to
fai, as happened in https://dotty-ci.epfl.ch/lampepfl/dotty/1487/1/8
while trying to publish Dotty 0.19.0-RC1:
gpg: signing failed: Cannot allocate memory

I've opened an issue at sbt/sbt-pgp#168, but
meanwhile this is fixed by reverting back to using bouncycastle by
setting SBT_PGP_USE_GPG=0 as documented in the README of sbt-pgp.

@anatoliykmetyuk
Copy link
Contributor

Should I also merge this in 0.19.x?

In 54266c1 I upgraded sbt-pgp from
1.1.0 to 2.0.0-M2, this changed the way signing was done: instead of
using the bouncycastle Java library, sbt-pgp now just calls gpg.
Unfortunately, it turns out that multiple parallel calls to gpg can lead
to the gpg-agent running out of memory, causing `publishSigned` to
fai, as happened in https://dotty-ci.epfl.ch/lampepfl/dotty/1487/1/8
while trying to publish Dotty 0.19.0-RC1:
gpg: signing failed: Cannot allocate memory

I've opened an issue at sbt/sbt-pgp#168, but
meanwhile this is fixed by reverting back to using bouncycastle by
setting -DSBT_PGP_USE_GPG=false.
@smarter
Copy link
Member Author

smarter commented Sep 20, 2019

Should I also merge this in 0.19.x?

I've relaunched a publish build of 0.19 (https://dotty-ci.epfl.ch/lampepfl/dotty/1488), but if that fails I suggest doing that, yes.

@anatoliykmetyuk
Copy link
Contributor

Cool - thanks for looking into it!

@smarter smarter mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2019
42 tasks
@anatoliykmetyuk
Copy link
Contributor

Come to think about it I'll merge it on 0.19.x once it passes the CI. 0.18.1 stable did not have problems with signing (though still failed due to a sonatype glitch), yet 19-RC failed 3 times due to the signing problem.

@anatoliykmetyuk anatoliykmetyuk merged commit 187bd85 into scala:master Sep 20, 2019
@anatoliykmetyuk anatoliykmetyuk deleted the pgp-bouncycastle branch September 20, 2019 20:53
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