-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Local rustdoc search doesn't work with --no-deps #63666
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
Comments
And now I noticed: When I build with |
Yes, when generating docs, rustdoc look at the target directory and changes a few things depending on what it finds. To go back on your original issue, I think it'll fail again if you remove the folder and regenerate with |
triage: seems fixed |
Please don't close issues if there is no regression test. |
is there a label for "fixed, but has no regression test"? |
Not that I know of. |
found it. |
I'm having an issue that is similar to rust-lang/docs.rs#316, but it's about local docs.
I'm using
cargo doc --no-deps --open
, and on the opened page the search does not work. It shows "Loading search results..." and doesn't complete, just like in the link above.The JS console says:
TypeError: paths is undefined (main.js:95:15458)
, and in the JS debugger I see the following: It's trying to accessrawSearchIndex['byteorder'].p
, butrawSearchIndex['byteorder']
does not havep
. It looks like the following:However, for my own crate it works correctly:
Actually I guess there should be nothing about
byteorder
at all in the index, because I built the docs with--no-deps
, and alas, when building without--no-deps
, the search works!Now, I tried to build again with
--no-deps
, and it still works. Apparently it was trying to load some old index file that had an outdated format ...It's great when a problem gets solved while writing the issue report 😆, but I think this issue might still serve a purpose, so I'll open it anyway, if only for others to find it. And maybe rustdoc should try harder to not load outdated index files.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: