Stop -O/-C opt-level and -g/-C debuginfo conflicting
#60426
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
varkor
commented
Apr 30, 2019
| @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ | |||
| -include ../../run-make-fulldeps/tools.mk | |||
|
|
|||
| # FIXME: it would be good to check that it's actually the rightmost flags | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ideas for checking this in the test are welcome!
varkor
changed the title
-O and -C opt-level, and -g and -C debuginfo, conflicting-O/-C opt-level and -g/-C debuginfo conflicting
nagisa
reviewed
May 1, 2019
|
Looks reasonable to me! I think testing manually here is fine for now, I also don't know of a great way to test that the right setting is applied. Could this also include a small comment in the argument parsing about how it's finding the last option specified? |
Done. |
Merged
|
r=me when this is ready to go |
varkor
force-pushed
the
fix-duplicate-arg-handling
branch
from
18ca3d8
to
f6b5e8a
Compare
|
@bors r=alexcrichton |
|
📌 Commit f6b5e8a has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors rollup |
|
@bors rollup- (don't rollup PRs that touch |
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2019
…r=alexcrichton Stop `-O`/`-C opt-level` and `-g`/`-C debuginfo` conflicting Allow `-O` and `-C opt-level`, and `-g` and `-C debuginfo` to be specified simultaneously without conflict. In such cases, the rightmost provided option is chosen. Fixes rust-lang#7493. Fixes rust-lang#32352. ~Blocked on rust-lang/getopts#79 r? @alexcrichton
https://travis-ci.com/rust-lang/rust/jobs/197566788 via #60519 |
|
@bors r- |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #60117) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
varkor
force-pushed
the
fix-duplicate-arg-handling
branch
from
2eec7f5
to
5ba5d35
Compare
|
@bors r=alexcrichton |
|
📌 Commit 5ba5d35 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors r=alexcrichton |
|
📌 Commit 80f54ba has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit 80f54ba with merge 231d2cd07198440faf373029ea581e2450e61825... |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-travis |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors retry |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
These command line flags can conflict though. Why should we not emit an error? |
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2019
…r=alexcrichton Stop `-O`/`-C opt-level` and `-g`/`-C debuginfo` conflicting Allow `-O` and `-C opt-level`, and `-g` and `-C debuginfo` to be specified simultaneously without conflict. In such cases, the rightmost provided option is chosen. Fixes rust-lang#7493. Fixes rust-lang#32352. ~Blocked on rust-lang/getopts#79 r? @alexcrichton
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2019
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #60131 (Fix broken link in rustc_plugin doc) - #60426 (Stop `-O`/`-C opt-level` and `-g`/`-C debuginfo` conflicting) - #60515 (use span instead of div for since version) - #60530 (rustc: rename all occurences of "freevar" to "upvar".) - #60536 (Correct code points to match their textual description) Failed merges: r? @ghost
|
@Zoxc: the original issue threads contain motivation. Flags in general can be specified multiple times and |
|
I guess nonsensical things like |
|
It's not nonsensical, it's needed for hierarchical build systems. |
|
s/hierarchical/broken/ |
Lonami
reviewed
May 8, 2019
|
|
||
| # FIXME: it would be good to check that it's actually the rightmost flags | ||
| # that are used when multiple flags are specified, but I can't think of a | ||
| # reliable way to check this. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't we make rustc show or warn to stderr about which flag it chose? "Note: both foo and bar specified. Using bar", then, we could just capture its output and compare.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(cc @varkor for his comment on #60426 (comment) which I read just now)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Allow
-Oand-C opt-level, and-gand-C debuginfoto be specified simultaneously without conflict. In such cases, the rightmost provided option is chosen.Fixes #7493.
Fixes #32352.
Blocked on rust-lang/getopts#79.r? @alexcrichton