This updates the flags used for doctest xcompile to match the upstream
changes in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137096 which renamed
and stabilized the flags.
This cannot be merged until after nightly is published tonight.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
I recently depended on a package with `preserve-order` rather than
`preserve_order` and the error message didn't help me with the problem
so I figure I'd fix that. I also found other improvements along the way
- Suggest an alternative feature when a feature includes a missing
feature
- Suggest an alternative feature when a dependency includes a missing
feature
- Lower case error messages
- Re-frame prescriptive information as help
- Change plural "features" error messages to singular "feature" as they
can only ever have one (knowing an the `MissingFeature` string only has
one feature in it was important for doing a `closest` match on the
feature).
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes#15445, where there were still differences between the format of
package ids of "`cargo metadata` and build JSON messages", and
`--unit-graph` package ids.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Everything compiles correctly (and outputs what's expected). I also
fixed the testcases
changes summary :
- change the `pkg_id` field of `struct SerializedUnit<'a>` to be `PackageIdSpec` instead of `PackageId`
- change the unit-graph testcases to match the changes
(cleaning previous commits so every commit passes CI checks, as required)
This PR contains the following updates:
| Package | Update | Change |
|---|---|---|
|
[cargo-semver-checks](https://redirect.github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks)
| minor | `0.40.0` -> `0.41.0` |
---
### Release Notes
<details>
<summary>obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks (cargo-semver-checks)</summary>
###
[`v0.41.0`](https://redirect.github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/compare/v0.40.0...v0.41.0)
[Compare
Source](https://redirect.github.com/obi1kenobi/cargo-semver-checks/compare/v0.40.0...v0.41.0)
</details>
---
### Configuration
📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - Every minute ( * * * * * ) (UTC),
Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).
🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you
are satisfied.
♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the
rebase/retry checkbox.
🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update
again.
---
- [ ] <!-- rebase-check -->If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check
this box
---
This PR was generated by [Mend Renovate](https://mend.io/renovate/).
View the [repository job
log](https://developer.mend.io/github/rust-lang/cargo).
<!--renovate-debug:eyJjcmVhdGVkSW5WZXIiOiIzOS4yNDguNCIsInVwZGF0ZWRJblZlciI6IjM5LjI0OC40IiwidGFyZ2V0QnJhbmNoIjoibWFzdGVyIiwibGFiZWxzIjpbXX0=-->
<!--
Thanks for submitting a pull request 🎉! Here are some tips for you:
* If this is your first contribution, read "Cargo Contribution Guide"
first:
https://doc.crates.io/contrib/
* Run `cargo fmt --all` to format your code changes.
* Small commits and pull requests are always preferable and easy to
review.
* If your idea is large and needs feedback from the community, read how:
https://doc.crates.io/contrib/process/#working-on-large-features
* Cargo takes care of compatibility. Read our design principles:
https://doc.crates.io/contrib/design.html
* When changing help text of cargo commands, follow the steps to
generate docs:
https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/tree/master/src/doc#building-the-man-pages
* If your PR is not finished, set it as "draft" PR or add "WIP" in its
title.
* It's ok to use the CI resources to test your PR, but please don't
abuse them.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
remove duplicate word in comment
### How should we test and review this PR?
Demonstrate how you test this change and guide reviewers through your
PR.
With a smooth review process, a pull request usually gets reviewed
quicker.
If you don't know how to write and run your tests, please read the
guide:
https://doc.crates.io/contrib/tests
### Additional information
Other information you want to mention in this PR, such as prior arts,
future extensions, an unresolved problem, or a TODO list.
-->
remove duplicate word in comment
Because the last string in this match statement was over 100 characters,
it prevented rustfmt from formatting the entire thing. By wrapping it,
that allows rustfmt to do its job.
Because the last string in this match statement was over 100 characters,
it prevented rustfmt from formatting the entire thing. By wrapping it,
that allows rustfmt to do its job.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This PR uses `zlib-rs` via the `flate2` crate. It is used for
(de)compressing gzip files (e.g. in `cargo package`).
Using zlib-rs is significantly faster, and produces output of roughly
similar size. For the `windows-bindgen` crate
(a very large crate), the speedup is over 60%, or about 2 seconds.
```
> time cargo package -p windows-bindgen --no-verify
Packaging windows-bindgen v0.61.0 (/home/folkertdev/rust/windows-rs/crates/libs/bindgen)
Updating crates.io index
Packaged 76 files, 31.2MiB (8.2MiB compressed)
________________________________________________________
Executed in 3.30 secs fish external
usr time 3.19 secs 424.00 micros 3.19 secs
sys time 0.05 secs 61.00 micros 0.05 secs
> time ~/rust/cargo/target/release/cargo package -p windows-bindgen --no-verify
Packaging windows-bindgen v0.61.0 (/home/folkertdev/rust/windows-rs/crates/libs/bindgen)
Updating crates.io index
Packaged 76 files, 31.2MiB (8.3MiB compressed)
________________________________________________________
Executed in 1.25 secs fish external
usr time 1.15 secs 0.00 micros 1.15 secs
sys time 0.04 secs 589.00 micros 0.04 secs
```
### How should we test and review this PR?
Generally CI/the test suite should handle correctness.
Something to look out for is zlib-rs producing larger binaries than
before. So far we're seeing output sizes that are roughly the same
(sometimes a bit better, sometimes a bit worse) as the status quo.
We've not specifically looked at decompression yet, mostly because we
could not come up with a good command to benchmark. In general zlib-rs
is much faster than stock zlib there too.
### Additional information
For the time being, `cargo` still depends on stock zlib via e.g. `curl`
and `git`. As far as I know it is the intention to eventually move away
from these C dependencies, at which point the dependency on stock zlib
also disappears.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
- separates each test into different test cases
- `snapbox` is used to test the snapshots
- difference in `.json` file alone should never cause a test to fail
- `.json` files updated only if expected fix != actual fix &&
`SNAPSHOTS=overwrite`
- when `.json` files are updated, the json is pretty printed
- replaced environment variables `RUSTFIX_TEST_*` for overwriting test
snapshots with `SNAPSHOTS=overwrite`
- ❗ The `RUSTFIX_TEST_RECORD_FIXED_RUST` feature is removed (generate a
`*.fixed.rs` on demand`). We can add it back whenever needed.
Fixes#13891
### How should we test and review this PR?
Run tests with:
```sh
cargo test -p rustfix
```
All the test should run as different test cases
nightly tests run only when using nightly version of rustc is used
If a library exists both in an added folder inside OUT_DIR and in the
OS, prefer to use the one within OUT_DIR. Folders within OUT_DIR and
folders outside OUT_DIR do not change their relative order between
themselves.
This is accomplished by sorting by whether we think the path is inside
the search path or outside.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes#15220. If a Rust crates builds a dynamic library & that same
dynamic library is installed in the host OS, the result of the build's
success & consistent behavior of executed tools depends on whether or
not the user has the conflicting dynamic library in the external search
path. If they do, then the host OS library will always be used which is
unexpected - updates to your Rust dependency will still have you linking
& running against an old host OS library (i.e. someone who doesn't have
that library has a different silent behavior).
### How should we test and review this PR?
This is what I did to verify my issue got resolved but I'm sure there's
a simpler example one could construct.
* Make sure Alsa and libllama.so are installed (on Arch I installed
alsa-lib and llama.cpp-cuda).
* Clone llama-cpp-2 & init llama.cpp submodule & update the submodule to
point to https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/pull/11997 instead.
* Add plumbing to expose the new method within llama-cpp-2 as a public
facing function on the LlamaModel struct (it's basically the same code
as for n_head, just calling n_head_kv from llama.cpp).
* Add cpal as a dependency in crate "foo"
* Add llama-cpp-2 via path as a dependency in crate "foo" and enable the
`dynamic-link` feature.
* Add code using the newly expose n_head_kv method in crate "foo" in
main.rs. NOTE: Code just needs to compile & be exported, doesn't have to
be correct (fn main is probably easiest.
* Add some basic code that tries to initialize cpal in crate "foo" in fn
main.
* Try to build / run crate "foo"
Before my change, it fails with a linker error saying it can't find
`llama_model_n_head_kv` because /usr/lib appears in the search path
before the directory that contains the libllama.so that was built
internally by the crate. This is because cpal depends on alsa-sys which
uses pkg-config which adds /usr/lib to the search path before the
llama-cpp-sys-2 build.rs is run.
### Additional information
I'm not sure how to add tests so open to some help on that. I wanted to
make sure that this approach is even correct. I coded this to change
Cargo minimally and defensively since I don't know the internals of
Cargo very well (e.g. I don't know if I have to compare against both
`script_out_dir` / `script_out_dir_when_generated` since I don't know
the difference & there's not really any explanation on what they are).
It's possible this over-complicates the implementation so open to any
feedback. Additionally, the sort that happens prior to each build up of
the rustc environment is not where I'd ideally place it. I think it
would be more efficient to have the list of search paths be
free-floating and not tied to a BuildOutput so that they could be kept
updated live & resorted only on insertion (since it's changed less
frequently than rustc is invoked). Additionally, the generalized sort is
correct but pessimistic - maintaining the list sorted could be done
efficiently with some minor book keeping (i.e. you'd only need to sort
the new paths & then could quickly inject into the middle of a
VecDeque).
And of course in terms of correctness, I didn't do a thorough job
testing across all possible platforms. From first principles this seems
directionally correct but it's always possible this breaks someone
else's workflow. I'm also uneasy that the relative position of `-L` /
`-l` arguments changes in this PR & I'm not sure if that's observable
behavior or not (i.e. it used to be -L for a crate followed by `-l` for
a crate), but now it's `-L` for all crates, still grouped by crated
internally, followed by `-l` by crate).
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Bad copy/paste in #14902
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
Found this when looking at how we handle MSRV in `build-rs`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This reverts commit 71ea2e5c5fa285e8e0336d51fd03ba4a427154bf.
`Repository::discover` and `Repository::status_file` are too expenstive
to run inside a loop. And `cargo package` are doing a lot of duplicate
works for checking submodule VCS status.
Alternative fixes might look like
* Let `status_submodules` function returns a path entry set, so
Cargo can check whether a source file is dirty based on that.
* When listing files in `PathSource`, attach the VCS status of a
path entry assoicated with. Then subsequent operations can skip
status check entirely.
However, the above solutions are not trivial, and the dirtiness check is
informational only based on T-cargo conclusion, so we should be
good just reverting the change now.
Again, the caveat of this is that we can't really detect
dirty symlinks that link into a Git submodule.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Should be good to merge. We still got #15384 fixed via
d760263afb02c747a246bb0471a4f51e09075246
### Additional information
See
<https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/15384#issuecomment-2797064033>.
This reverts commit 71ea2e5c5fa285e8e0336d51fd03ba4a427154bf.
`Repository::discover` and `Repository::status_file` are too expenstive
to run inside a loop. And `cargo package` are doing a lot of duplicate
works for checking submodule VCS status.
The possible fix might look like
* Let `status_submodules` function returns a path entry set, so
Cargo can check whether a source file is dirty based on that.
* When listing files in `PathSource`, attach the VCS status of a
path entry assoicated with. Then subsequent operations can skip
status check entirely.
The above solutions are not trivial, and the dirtiness check is
informational only based on T-cargo conclusion, so we should be
good just reverting the change now.
Again, the caveat of this is that we can't really detect
dirty symlinks that links into a Git submodule.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This PR improves the error message when an invalid template variable is
used in the `build.build-dir` config.
I am using `closest_msg` to find a close match. If there are no close
matches, we simply print the available template variables list.
See #14125
r? @epage
Regardless of crate search paths emitted, always prefer searching search
paths pointing into the artifacts directory to those pointing outside.
This way libraries built by Cargo are preferred even if the same library
name exists in the system & a crate earlier in the build process emitted
a system library path for searching.
### What does this PR try to resolve?
If a there is a symlink into a git repository/submodule,
when checking its git status with the wrong outer repo,
we'll get an NotFound error,
as the object doesn't belong to the outer repository.
This kind of error blocked the entire `cargo package` operation.
This fix additionally discovers the nearest Git repository,
and then checks status with that,
assuming the repo is the parent of the source file of the symlink.
This is a best effort solution, so if the check fails we ignore.
### How should we test and review this PR?
If we don't want the complication,
we could drop the last commit, ignore the error, and forget about
handling submodules
fixes#15384fixes#15413
If a there is a symlink into a git repository/submodule,
when checking its git status with the wrong outer repo,
we'll get an NotFound error,
as the object doesn't belong to the outer repository.
This kind of error blocked the entire `cargo package` operation.
This fix additionally discovers the nearest Git repository,
and then checks status with that,
assuming the repo is the parent of the source file of the symlink.
This is a best effort solution, so if the check fails we ignore.
