-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
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
Force different metadata for sysroot crates #269
Conversation
Thanks for all the extra research! You convinced me that this is a reasonable approach. It would be better to have a test-case, but it seems that is not realistic -- ultimately that means that if this breaks it'll be on you to detect and help fix the problem, but given the low amount of activity here I guess that is not too much of a burden. @jethrogb what do you think? |
I don't have time to look into this in too much detail. I find #261 (comment) convincing and I support making xargo more like the standard compiler build flow in that regard. |
ef6df7b
to
394d272
Compare
Thanks! bors r+ |
269: Force different metadata for sysroot crates r=RalfJung a=roblabla If the sysroot and project share a dependency, it might cause conflicts, leading to confusing cargo errors. See https://github.com/roblabla/xargo-reproducer for a reproducer of the issue. This is the same patch as #217 . Fixes #261 I have a way to reproduce the issue this time around (see the issue), but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to properly integrate it within xargo's smoketest. I don't think it's really possible to do in a robust way, actually... Co-authored-by: roblabla <unfiltered@roblab.la>
Build succeeded |
Hey, would it be possible to release a new version with this change please? 🙏 |
Preparing a new release at #270 |
If the sysroot and project share a dependency, it might cause conflicts, leading to confusing cargo errors. See https://github.com/roblabla/xargo-reproducer for a reproducer of the issue. This is the same patch as #217 .
Fixes #261
I have a way to reproduce the issue this time around (see the issue), but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to properly integrate it within xargo's smoketest. I don't think it's really possible to do in a robust way, actually...