This adds three new versions in the 31.* series. Release notes of 31.0.0 at https://github.com/acts-project/acts/releases/tag/v31.0.0. No changes to the CMakeLists.txt files that need addressing in the package recipe.
The only new feature I'm a bit concerned about is https://github.com/acts-project/acts/pull/2626, which replaces testing for C++20 concepts support by the feature-testing macro `__cpp_concepts`, which is also a C++20 feature. So technically we now should require `cxxstd=20` even though Acts itself still allows (and defaults to) 17. Judging by https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/20, the support for feature-testing macros was added very early by most compilers.
This PR changes the default behavior of `spack config get` and `spack config blame`
to print a flattened version of the entire spack configuration, including any active
environment, if the commands are invoked with no section arguments.
The new behavior is used in Gitlab CI to help debug CI configuration, but it can also
be useful when asking for more information in issues, or when simply debugging Spack.
Convert the 'develop' section of an environment to a dedicated configuration section.
This means for example that instead of having to define `develop` specs in the
`spack.yaml`, the environment can `include:` another `develop.yaml` configuration
which specifies which specs should be developed in the environment.
This change is not expected to be disruptive given that existing environment `spack.yaml`
files will conform to the new schema.
(Update 11/28/2023) I have implemented the `develop`/`undevelop` commands in terms
of more-generic modification functions added to the `config` module: `change_or_add`
and `update_all`. It is assumed that the semantics added here (described in 11/18 update)
would be desirable to extend to other config update actions (e.g. adding compilers,
changing package requirements, adding mirrors).
(Update 11/18/2023) I have updated this such that `spack develop`, and
`spack undevelop` to potentially modify all writable scopes, like
https://github.com/spack/spack/pull/41147. https://github.com/spack/spack/pull/35307
will be useful for modifying included scopes, but generally speaking specifying a
`--scope` will not be required for `spack develop`: `spack develop` will add new
develop specs to whatever scope already has develop specs defined, or to the
highest-priority writable scope (which should be the env scope).
TODOs:
- [x] If you `spack undevelop` a package which is mentioned at multiple layers of
configuration, then currently this would only modify one of them. That's not
technically a new issue (has always existed for configuration modification), but
may be confusing to users when presented via an interface other than `spack config set`
- [x] Need to add (or confirm) the ability to modify individual config files by providing
a path (rather than using a scope identifier as a key to retrieve associated config).
- [x] `spack develop` adds new develop specs to the scope that defines them
(potentially skipping higher priority scopes to e.g. augment included scope files)
---------
Co-authored-by: scheibelp <scheibelp@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Todd Gamblin <tgamblin@llnl.gov>
* py-plum-dispatch: add new package
* Update var/spack/repos/builtin/packages/py-plum-dispatch/package.py
Co-authored-by: Adam J. Stewart <ajstewart426@gmail.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam J. Stewart <ajstewart426@gmail.com>
* py-htgettoken: use os.environ, avoid AttributeError
This avoids the following error:
```
Warning: could not load runtime environment due to AttributeError: 'EnvironmentModifications' object has no attribute 'get'
```
* py-htgettoken: allow for undefined variables
* py-htgettoken: use dict get()
Co-authored-by: Adam J. Stewart <ajstewart426@gmail.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam J. Stewart <ajstewart426@gmail.com>
