Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[beta] Prepare beta 1.42.0 #68595

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 29, 2020
Merged

[beta] Prepare beta 1.42.0 #68595

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 29, 2020

Conversation

pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

r? @ghost

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ p=1000 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 28, 2020

📌 Commit f63699d has been approved by pietroalbini

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jan 28, 2020
@pietroalbini pietroalbini mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2020
Closed
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 28, 2020

⌛ Testing commit f63699d with merge 9753ac1ae40ac1f7c364f215d7a412f618bff65f...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 28, 2020

💔 Test failed - checks-azure

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 28, 2020
@mati865 mati865 mentioned this pull request Jan 28, 2020
Closed
@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Jan 28, 2020

@pietroalbini Can you add #68586 to the PR so that we can avoid having to beta-backport it?

@mati865
Copy link
Contributor

mati865 commented Jan 28, 2020

I think #68579 should also be included.
Otherwise Cargo from beta toolchain will be broken in the same way it's broken in current nightly (#68591).

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member Author

@bors retry

Let's handle beta backports the normal way.

@bors bors 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 29, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 29, 2020

⌛ Testing commit f63699d with merge b5258f87fe64ba129a30537d34a0fd6e11e6c091...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 29, 2020

💔 Test failed - checks-azure

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jan 29, 2020
@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

It seems like to be blocked by toolstate (CI says rustfmt is test-fail).

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member Author

Yep, I tried it locally before retrying but it passed :/

@rust-lang/wg-rustfmt do you have any idea on the cause of the failure?

@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

At a glance, there're warnings which are only shown here, like:

Warning: can't set `report_todo = Always`, unstable features are only available in nightly channel.

So, test_valid_license_template_path seems failed.

JohnTitor
JohnTitor reviewed Jan 29, 2020
View reviewed changes
src/stage0.txt

# We use a nightly rustfmt to format the source because it solves some bootstrapping
# issues with use of new syntax in this repo. If you're looking at the beta/stable branch, this key should be omitted,
# as we don't want to depend on rustfmt from nightly there.
rustfmt: nightly-2019-12-18
#rustfmt: nightly-2019-12-18
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm really not sure but this may cause the failure here? (Yeah, the comment says it should be omitted though.)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, this should not be responsible. The rustfmt here is purely for x.py fmt, it doesn't affect testing at all (we build a rustfmt from scratch from that).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, didn't know that. So it shouldn't be the cause...

@mati865
Copy link
Contributor

mati865 commented Jan 29, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Failing rustfmt tests should've been ignored on beta: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/blob/cc56957656ff9b14168805104f901b19550cea07/rustfmt-core/rustfmt-config/src/lib.rs#L481

There were few changes to src/tools/compiletest recently. Maybe it doesn't set CFG_RELEASE_CHANNEL environment variable anymore?

EDIT: Looking at #68019 it seems to me compiletest could previously use unstable features but that is no longer the case.

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Compiletest wasn't used for these tests AFAICT, they're just regular cargo test tests?

https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/blob/1838235248bbde125bbc6c12fb493e1979088bb5/src/config/mod.rs#L477-L482 is the source for the failing test_valid_license_template_path test, which does not have the gate you noted? I think you are pointing at the wrong commit unless I'm missing something. rustfmt on beta is at rust-lang/rustfmt@1838235

We probably do need that annotation though...

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

I have no idea which of the system tests are failing though, nor do I know how to find out. rustfmt doesn't appear to log anywhere which one actually failed, which is super unhelpful. It could be more missing gating on instability, though.

cc @topecongiro

@mati865
Copy link
Contributor

mati865 commented Jan 29, 2020

Yeah, you are right.
Failing tests:

config::test::test_valid_license_template_path
test::system_tests

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Okay, I bumped the rustfmt submodule to include a commit which backports rust-lang/rustfmt@f82171a (my impression is that this fixes the test failures). I also confirmed Cargo is sufficiently recent that we should avoid the main infinite loop bug.

@bors r+ p=100

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 29, 2020

📌 Commit 278984a has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

@bors bors 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 29, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 29, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 278984a with merge 6ce2ba4...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2020
@bors
Auto merge of #68595 - pietroalbini:beta-next, r=Mark-Simulacrum
6ce2ba4 
[beta] Prepare beta 1.42.0

r? @ghost
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jan 29, 2020

☀️ Test successful - checks-azure
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing 6ce2ba4 to beta...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jan 29, 2020
@bors bors merged commit 278984a into rust-lang:beta Jan 29, 2020
@pietroalbini pietroalbini deleted the beta-next branch March 10, 2020 10:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@JohnTitor JohnTitor JohnTitor left review comments

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@pietroalbini @bors @Centril @mati865 @JohnTitor @Mark-Simulacrum