Move Linux CI from Azure Pipelines to GitHub Actions

[joshtriplett]

This simplifies the CI setup substantially. In particular, this installs packages as part of the CI setup, rather than in a separate manual container build step where modifications by contributors are ineffective until the container images are regenerated.

Now, changes to provisioning will take immediate effect, allowing upgrades to new versions to be contributed and tested easily.

This does not move macOS over, because I don't have sufficient experience with macOS to easily debug the issues that occur when attempting to do so.

• Fixes Linux part of Move CI from Azure Pipelines to GitHub Actions #1226.

[joshtriplett]

@kkysen Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

[kkysen]

@kkysen Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

Do you know how to do that?

[joshtriplett]

@kkysen Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

Do you know how to do that?

I believe it'll be in the GitHub actions settings, either for the project or for the organization. There's a setting for where it can run actions from.

[kkysen]

@kkysen Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

Do you know how to do that?

I believe it'll be in the GitHub actions settings, either for the project or for the organization. There's a setting for where it can run actions from.

@thedataking, can you see if you're able to do this? I don't see where I can, or I probably don't have permission to do it. See the error message here: https://github.com/immunant/c2rust/actions/runs/14911291371.

[joshtriplett]

@kkysen I think this is ready to merge now.

[kkysen]

LGTM but I'd still like @thedataking to take a final look, particularly about moving from testing on multiple distros to just Ubuntu. I think it's likely fine, and GitHub Actions have numerous benefits, but I just want to double check.

[kkysen]

Also I'm re-running CI to see how long a cached CI takes, although that should improve a bunch with rust-cache.

[thedataking]

@joshtriplett appreciate the work to fix our CI. Thanks!

Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

I'd prefer to use the "vanilla" cache module unless there is some clear benefit. Wouldn't the pattern below work?

      - name: cache rust crates
        uses: actions/cache@v4
        with:
          path: |
            ~/.cargo/bin/
            ~/.cargo/registry/index/
            ~/.cargo/registry/cache/
            ~/.cargo/git/db/
            target/
          key: ${{ runner.os }}-cargo-${{ hashFiles('**/Cargo.lock') }}

[kkysen]

• Fixes Linux part of Move CI from Azure Pipelines to GitHub Actions #1226.

I updated this. We still have macOS to do, right?

[joshtriplett]

@joshtriplett appreciate the work to fix our CI. Thanks!

Would you mind safelisting Swatinem/rust-cache for GitHub Actions?

I'd prefer to use the "vanilla" cache module unless there is some clear benefit. Wouldn't the pattern below work?

      - name: cache rust crates
        uses: actions/cache@v4
        with:
          path: |
            ~/.cargo/bin/
            ~/.cargo/registry/index/
            ~/.cargo/registry/cache/
            ~/.cargo/git/db/
            target/
          key: ${{ runner.os }}-cargo-${{ hashFiles('**/Cargo.lock') }}

Caching correctly is a lot more complicated than that, and also involves caching more than that. The cache needs to depend on the toolchain, the job, etc. And the cache should include the results of compiling the dependencies, so that most builds are relatively fast. Doing it right requires logic on par with what rust-cache already does.

If you want to lock it down to a specific version of rust-cache, we could do that, and be very deliberate about upgrading it.

[thedataking]

Thanks for educating me. Khyber mentioned that rust-lang also uses this action which eases my concern somewhat.

If you want to lock it down to a specific version of rust-cache, we could do that, and be very deliberate about upgrading it.

OK, v2 should be whitelisted now. Could we have a comment in the workflow to remind us why we're not using Github's cache action?

[joshtriplett]

@kkysen OK, this is ready now, fixes all the items that have been commented on, and uses caching.

[kkysen]

All good now, thank you!!