stabilize combining +bundle and +whole-archive link modifiers by Be-ing · Pull R...
source link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113301
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Conversation
Per discussion on #108081 combining +bundle and +whole-archive already works and can be stabilized independently of other aspects of the packed_bundled_libs feature. There is no risk of regression because this was not previously allowed.
added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
labels
This comment has been minimized.
Contributor
Could you remove all uses of |
Contributor
The |
added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
Contributor
Author
What about the other use of the feature? |
Contributor
That's a command line option, not feature. |
Contributor
Author
Ah, I didn't realize those were turned on in different ways. |
force-pushed the stabilize_bundle_whole-archive
branch
5 times, most recently
from
6df6d02
to
6ecbc30
Compare
Contributor
Author
Sorry for letting this sit for a while. @petrochenkov I have rebased it and addressed review comments. Brief summaryCurrently, combining +bundle and +whole-archive works only with This commit stabilizes the Per discussion on #108081 there is no risk of regression stabilizing the crate feature in this way because the combination of +bundle,+whole-archive link modifiers was previously not allowed. DocumentationI don't think anything needs to be updated for this? From users' perspective it's merely allowing a combination of existing link modifiers that previously failed with an error. Teststests/run-make/rlib-format-packed-bundled-libs-3/rust_dep.rs Real world example of Rust code requiring this feature: KDAB/cxx-qt#598 Unresolved questionsThe |
Contributor
@rfcbot fcp merge |
Team member @petrochenkov has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
added proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off. disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.
labels
added S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). I-compiler-nominated Indicates that an issue has been nominated for discussion during a compiler team meeting.
and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
labels
removed the I-compiler-nominated Indicates that an issue has been nominated for discussion during a compiler team meeting. label
added final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
and removed proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
labels
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
added finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting
and removed final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
labels
The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete. As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed. This will be merged soon. |
Contributor
@bors r+ |
added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
and removed S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label).
labels
Contributor
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Collaborator
Finished benchmarking commit (56ada88): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 631.332s -> 630.734s (-0.09%) |
bors-ferrocene bot
added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request
bors-ferrocene bot
added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request
bors-ferrocene bot
added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request
bors-ferrocene bot
added a commit to ferrocene/ferrocene that referenced this pull request
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
None yet
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK