File tree 1 file changed +8
-1
lines changed
1 file changed +8
-1
lines changed Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change 1
1
- Feature Name: ` cargo_cli_rustflags `
2
2
- Start Date: 2022-09-01
3
- - RFC PR: [ rust-lang/rfcs #0000 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/0000 )
3
+ - RFC PR: [ rust-lang/rfcs #3310 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3310 )
4
4
- Rust Issue: [ rust-lang/rust #0000 ] ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/0000 )
5
5
6
6
# Summary
@@ -256,6 +256,13 @@ There currently exists multiple ways of setting Rust compiler flags when buildin
256
256
earlier, there about 7 different ways that already exist today and this RFC is proposing to add yet another option. This could
257
257
lead to confusion about the best way to set Rust compiler flags in the community.
258
258
259
+ Another drawback of supporting this new option is that it would make it easier for a Rust developer to enable rustflags that could
260
+ impact ABI, and would be unsound to only compile a single crate with. A couple of examples of these kinds of rustflags are the
261
+ `-C soft-float` and `-C target-feature` rustc flags. This potential issue is not limited to the feature being proposed in this RFC,
262
+ it is currently possible to cause this by using the `cargo rustc` subcommand and passing one of the options listed above. Another way
263
+ of causing this issue is by using the `profile.<PROFILE>.package.<PACKAGE>.rustflags` manifest key to enable one of these rustflags
264
+ for only a specific package.
265
+
259
266
# Rationale and alternatives
260
267
[rationale-and-alternatives]: #rationale-and-alternatives
261
268
You can’t perform that action at this time.
0 commit comments