Upgrade to 2.3.3 #10
Closed
Upgrade to 2.3.3 #10
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I believe this is due to dated headers on upstream. I'm doing 2.3.5 build now with this issue fixed. |
|
Cool! Is there any way to preserve some form of |
Open
|
Closed for #13 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Begins adding new binaries from @stillonearth
Build is currently failing with a series of strange linking errors...
According to StackOverflow, these would suggest that the binaries weren't all built together...
Or perhaps my headers are mismatched with the binaries??
Were these binaries built based on the
2.3.3tag at google-deepmind/mujoco@dfd463c ? Or was it the head ofmain?