-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
Stricter need_dev_deps behaviour #5186
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3e07a3e
Fix a bug in #5152 that causes rustc/rustdoc to fail unnecessarily
infinity0 89d2748
Revert "Work around #5134 for now"
infinity0 89d5161
Fix need_dev_deps to return false during a default `cargo build` run
infinity0 0bf8e54
Add tests for --all-targets
infinity0 ce26ddf
Rename stuff for clarity
infinity0 0bc1155
Split tests, apparently `cargo clean` does not work well on windows
infinity0 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was this change needed for the correctness of the patch? I think it changes the behavior of
cargo rustc
by default (erroring today whereas after this patch it succeeds and builds multiple crates)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this is needed for e.g.
cargo rustc
with no args to work in the first place.Assuming "package" and "crate" are the same thing, the behaviour you're describing is tested for by
fail_with_multiple_packages
which still passes. There is also afails_when_trying_to_build_main_and_lib_with_args
test for failing when multiple targets are selected, and it is still passing as well.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, this is not correct. The hunk here is needed for
cargo rustc --all-targets
with no further args to work, which is documented as part of its CLI. Furthermore it's also needed when passing cargo args like-v
, as opposed to binary-target args that go after--
which is whatfails_when_trying_to_build_main_and_lib_with_args
tests for and this is still passing.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm I think the documentation is wrong then? The
cargo rustc
command was only ever intended to work with only one targetThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok but my commit here doesn't affect this (i.e. it was broken before and it's broken afterwards), it only fixes the
--
related behaviour that was broken by #5152. If you runcargo rustc
using cargo 0.25.0 (the current stable) then it will still work with a multi-target crate, e.g.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah I see... odd! Well in any case it looks like nothing's changing so seems good to land!