Figure out why x.py test --stage 0 rust-analyzer doesn't work #99610

Activity

1. jyn514

   added

   T-bootstrapRelevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)

   A-contributor-roadblockArea: Makes things more difficult for new or seasoned contributors to RustArea: Makes things more difficult for new or seasoned contributors to Rust

   on Jul 22, 2022
2. jyn514 commented on Jul 23, 2022

   

   jyn514

   on Jul 23, 2022

   Last edited by jyn514

   Member

   More actions

   fix here:

   diff --git a/src/bootstrap/tool.rs b/src/bootstrap/tool.rs
   index 7c37621d417..0f20b74bcb4 100644
   --- a/src/bootstrap/tool.rs
   +++ b/src/bootstrap/tool.rs
   @@ -250,6 +250,15 @@ pub fn prepare_tool_cargo(
            }
        }
    
   +    if path.ends_with("rust-analyzer") {
   +        // RA wants to load proc macros at runtime for one of its tests. But by default, proc macros
   +        // are built with the beta proc_macro, not the in-tree proc_macro. Explicitly override this
   +        // in the rustc shim.
   +        // This is ok because rust-analyzer is `Mode::ToolStd`, so proc_macro is always built before.
   +        cargo.rustflag("--sysroot");
   +        cargo.rustflag(builder.sysroot(compiler).as_os_str().to_str().unwrap());
   +    }
   +
        // clippy tests need to know about the stage sysroot. Set them consistently while building to
        // avoid rebuilding when running tests.
        cargo.env("SYSROOT", builder.sysroot(compiler));

   will try to write this up more thoroughly soon
3. jyn514 commented on Sep 19, 2022

   

   jyn514

   on Sep 19, 2022

   Member

   More actions

   Oh fun, this isn't possible to test unless the proc-macro ABI changed in the last release 🤦
4. jyn514

   added

   P-lowLow priorityLow priority

   on Sep 19, 2022
5. onur-ozkan commented on Dec 25, 2023

   

   onur-ozkan

   on Dec 25, 2023

   Contributor

   More actions

   This no longer seems to be a problem.

   Tested on HEAD: f736079

   x test --stage 0 rust-analyzer:

   running 13 tests
   .............
   
   test result: ok. 13 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 1.27ms
   
           finished in 9.789 seconds
6. jyn514 commented on Dec 25, 2023

   

   jyn514

   on Dec 25, 2023

   Member

   More actions

   you need to combine it with a breaking change to the proc macro lib format in the same release cycle.

   maybe that's rare enough this isn't worth worrying about?
7. onur-ozkan commented on Dec 25, 2023

   

   onur-ozkan

   on Dec 25, 2023

   Contributor

   More actions

   you need to combine it with a breaking change to the proc macro lib format in the same release cycle.

   Sounds similar to #119172 (comment) problem (when public api changes on compiler crates, ra fails to build).

   maybe that's rare enough this isn't worth worrying about?

   I think so
8. jyn514 commented on Dec 25, 2023

   

   jyn514

   on Dec 25, 2023

   Last edited by jyn514

   Member

   More actions

   Sounds similar to #119172 (comment) problem (when public api changes on compiler crates, ra fails to build).

   kinda, but in this case a sync will only fix it for stage 1, not for stage 0

   👍React with 👍1Reacted by Onur Özkan