regression: linking with cc failed

[BoxyUwU]

• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/dilithium-raw-0.1.0/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/voro_rs-0.3.0/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/pqcrypto-newhope-0.1.2/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/woff-0.3.3/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/mountpoint-s3-crt-sys-0.8.0/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/pblib-rs-0.1.0/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/libwebp-sys-0.9.6/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/nostrdb-0.3.4/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/kangarootwelve_xkcp-0.1.5/log.txt
• https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/beta-1.82-1/beta-2024-09-05/reg/ion-c-sys-0.4.17/log.txt

there was far more than just these listed crates that had linker errors. It seems like significantly more than prior crater runs which is odd

[ChrisDenton]

cc @NobodyXu in case you have any ideas

[saethlin]

Something very fishy is going on here. libwebp-sys is small, well-maintained and has quite a few downloads, so I'm looking into that.

cargo +beta build --tests fails as crater indicates. I've tried every nightly in 2024-08-XX and 2024-09-XX and all of them can build the crate's tests.

The cc version doesn't seem to matter, I've tried versions back to 1.0.50 which is years old.

[saethlin]

I also cannot reproduce these linker errors using a toolchain that I've built from the beta branch.

[saethlin]

Ah! My confusion is because nightly now uses lld by default, which is a good little linker and takes care of you even if you give it a confusing argument order.

[saethlin]

Bisects to #128400

A crater run was done in that PR but the results were ignored because of the same confusion I ran into above #128400 (comment)

[apiraino]

As discussed on Zulip is there any actionable here, or can this issue be closed? #128400 was noted in the release notes (unsure if this is enough tho)

[lqd]

cc @petrochenkov

[apiraino]

Closing since #128400 will be mentioned in the release notes