initial version of checksum based freshness
Implementation for https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/14136 and resolves https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/6529
This PR implements the use of checksums in cargo fingerprints as an alternative to using mtimes. This is most useful on systems with poor mtime implementations.
This has a dependency on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/126930. It's expected this will increase the time it takes to declare a build to be fresh. Still this loss in performance may be preferable to the issues the ecosystem has had with the use of mtimes for determining freshness.
These tests are modified or renamed to reflect the switch to
checksum fingerprint:
* bust_patched_dep
* modifying_and_moving
* rebuild_on_mid_build_file_modification
* rebuild_sub_package_then_while_package
* skip_mtime_check_in_selected_cargo_home_subdirs
* use_mtime_cache_in_cargo_home
fix: avoid inserting duplicate `dylib_path_envvar` when calling `cargo run` recursively
### What does this PR try to resolve?
If the current program started by `cargo run` recursively call into `cargo run`, the second `cargo run` will insert `search_path` into `dylib_path_envvar` again.
Fixes#14194
### How should we test and review this PR?
The first commit adds the test to reflect the issue. The first call to `cargo run` stores the dylib search path env var to a file. Subsequent calls verify that env var remains the same.
The second commit fixes the behavior by checking if env vars in `search_path` are a prefix of the slice of env vars in `dylib_path_envvar`.
fix: Remove implicit feature removal
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Due to problems we ran into with #14016, we're removing implicit features from the 2024 edition to give ourselves more time to design it as we should.
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
I could have added a new flag for this or made an EditionNext but I decided to remove it in the hopes to avoid any path dependency in solving this the next time.
Due to problems we ran into with #14016, we're removing implicit
features from the 2024 edition to give ourselves more time to design it
as we should.
I could have added a new flag for this or made an EditionNext but I
decided to remove it in the hopes to avoid any path dependency in
solving this the next time.
feat: lockfile path implies --locked on cargo install
Follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/14421
Resolving one of the items
> cargo install should make --lockfile-path imply --locked
Simply mirrored behavior as if `--locked` was provided (on creating the workspace)
feat(toml): Add `autolib`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
PR #5335 added `autobins`, etc for #5330. Nowhere in there is
discussion of `autolib`.
Cargo script disables support for additional build-targets by disabling
discovery.
Except we don't have a way to disable discovery of `autolib`, leading to #14476.
By adding `autolib`, we can continue in that direction.
This also allows us to bypass inferring of libs on published packages,
like all other build-targets which were handled in #13849.
Fixes#14476
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
As this seems fairly low controversy, this insta-stabilizes the field.
In prior versions of Cargo, users will get an "unused manifest key"
warning.
For packages where this is set by `cargo publish`, the warning will be suppressed and things will work as normal.
For `cargo vendor`, the same except there will be some churn in the
vendored source as this field will now be set.
For local development, it should be rare to set `autolib` so the lack of
error by discovering a file when this is set shouldn't be a problem.
fix: correct error count for `cargo check --message-format json`
Hi! This is my first time contributing to Cargo. If there is anything that I need to do, please let me know!
(I'm not sure whether the commit message is aligned with the Cargo's convention. If it doesn't, I'm willing to modify it!)
This PR resolves the issue with incorrect error count and ensures warnings are correctly displayed when using `cargo check --message-format json`.
Fixes#14472
rust-lang/rust#122565 adds a new line to thread panic output.
To make the current test suites works on stable, beta, and nightly,
this relaxes the assertion around that by globbing everything.
feat: add CARGO_MANIFEST_PATH env variable
Adds `CARGO_MANIFEST_PATH` variable as part of https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/12207
Context: `CARGO_MANIFEST_DIR` is not very useful, because there is no `Cargo.toml` file when running a cargo script. In cases when multiple scripts are stored in the same folder, we can't tell which script exactly is being run using `CARGO_MANIFEST_DIR`
fix(config): Don't double-warn about `$CARGO_HOME/config`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
The core requirements for this bug are
- You have a `$CARGO_HOME/.config`
- Your project is inside of `$HOME`
We have a check to make sure we don't double-walk `$CARGO/config` but
that check is *after* we warn about there being no `.toml` extension.
To fix this, we just need to move that check outside of the file lookup.
This required changing the `seen` check from checking whether walked the
config file to checking if we've walked the config dir. As we only have
one file per directory, this should work.
Fixes#14560
### How should we test and review this PR?
test commit added the test, fix commit fixed the issue.
### Additional information
The core requirements for this bug are
- You have a `$CARGO_HOME/.config`
- Your project is inside of `$HOME`
We have a check to make sure we don't double-walk `$CARGO/config` but
that check is *after* we warn about there being no `.toml` extension.
To fix this, we just need to move that check outside of the file lookup.
This required changing the `seen` check from checking whether walked the
config file to checking if we've walked the config dir. As we only have
one file per directory, this should work.
Previously `cargo rustc -- <flags>` got a lower precedence than
some of the flags set by cargo internal.
This is a bit unintuitive as Cargo generally treats user-provided
CLI flags with the highest priority.
This commit changes `cargo rustc -- <flags>` to a higher precedence:
higher than most of flags set by Cargo, and only lower than
`build.rustflags` family.
Unsure if this affects people's workflow, so this behavior is only
enabled on nightly for collectin feedback. A environment variable
`__CARGO_RUSTC_ORIG_ARGS_PRIO=1` is provided for users to opt-out.
If everything goes well, the nightly gate will be removed after a
few of releases.
See discussion on https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/246057-t-cargo/topic/rustflags.20precendence.20of.20.60cargo.20rustc.60
feat: make lockfile v4 the default
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This commit makes lockfile version 4 the default version when Cargo
tries to write to a lockfile.
The lockfile version 4 has been stabilized since 1.78.0,
and will become default in 1.83.0.
the length of transition period is pretty similar as before.
One caveat is that in other output from Cargo,
e.g., `cargo metatada`, status messages,
`SourceID` will display in the v4 URL encoded format.
This shouldn't affect the majority of Rust users,
as `SourceId` representation should be opaque to them,
unless comparing `SourceId` across different version of toolchains.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Some of those tests don't really need to be `version = 4`.
They were updated for consistency.
### Additional information
This was discussed in Cargo meeting on 2024-09-24.
This commit makes lockfile version 4 the default version when Cargo
tries to write to a lockfile.
The lockfile version 4 has been stabilized since 1.78.0,
and will become default in 1.83.0.
the length of transition period is pretty similar as before.
One caveat is that in other output from Cargo,
e.g., `cargo metatada`, status messages,
`SourceID` will display in the v4 URL encoded format.
This shouldn't affect the majority of Rust users,
as `SourceId` representation should be opaque to them,
unless comparing `SourceId` across different version of toolchains.
PR #5335 added `autobins`, etc for #5330. Nowhere in there is
discussion of `autolib`.
Cargo script disables support for additional build-targets by disabling
discovery.
Except we don't have a way to disable discovery of `autolib`, leading to #14476.
By adding `autolib`, we can continue in that direction.
This also allows us to bypass inferring of libs on published packages,
like all other build-targets which were handled in #13849.
As this seems fairly low controversy, this insta-stabilizes the field.
In prior versions of Cargo, users will get an "unused manifest key"
warning.
For packags where this is set by `cargo publish`, the warning will be suppressed and things will work as normal.
For `cargo vendor`, the same except there will be some churn in the
vendored source as this field will now be set.
For local development, it should be rare to set `autolib` so the lack of
error by discovering a file when this is set shouldn't be a problem.
Fixes#14476
