-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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.
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
Pass target environment for rustdoc #3205
Conversation
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
I think this is correct, thanks! We can only run rustdoc tests in the case that host == target, so in that case it shouldn't matter which is used so long as both trigger the same library path logic. @bors: r+ |
📌 Commit 21cdb63 has been approved by |
Pass target environment for rustdoc This should fix #3200, but I am not sure that this is a correct fix, and I need some input to figure this out. `rustdoc` is invoked in two places, in `cargo_test.rs` and in `cargo_rustc/mod.rs`. Before the refactoring PR, these invocations used different LD_LIBRARY paths. [The one in cargo_rustc](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/3198/files#diff-59acd1a3101aebbb591ac7ab51c19d9eR427) used "host" version, while [the one in cargo_test](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/a8baa5b8f36e88170c8c56523b6eb72efc2cc55e/src/cargo/ops/cargo_test.rs#L131) used "target" version. The original PR changed both to "host", this PR switches both to "target". Is this correct, or should we stick with different environments for building documentation and doctests?
💔 Test failed - cargo-win-gnu-64 |
@bors: retry On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:00 AM, bors [email protected] wrote:
|
⚡ Previous build results for cargo-linux-32, cargo-linux-64, cargo-mac-64, cargo-win-msvc-64 are reusable. Rebuilding only cargo-cross-linux, cargo-mac-32, cargo-win-gnu-32, cargo-win-gnu-64, cargo-win-msvc-32... |
💔 Test failed - cargo-win-gnu-64 |
@bors: retry On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:13 AM, bors [email protected] wrote:
|
⚡ Previous build results for cargo-linux-32, cargo-linux-64, cargo-mac-32, cargo-mac-64, cargo-win-gnu-32, cargo-win-msvc-32, cargo-win-msvc-64 are reusable. Rebuilding only cargo-cross-linux, cargo-win-gnu-64... |
☀️ Test successful - cargo-cross-linux, cargo-linux-32, cargo-linux-64, cargo-mac-32, cargo-mac-64, cargo-win-gnu-32, cargo-win-gnu-64, cargo-win-msvc-32, cargo-win-msvc-64 |
This should fix #3200, but I am not sure that this is a correct fix, and I need some input to figure this out.
rustdoc
is invoked in two places, incargo_test.rs
and incargo_rustc/mod.rs
. Before the refactoring PR, these invocations used different LD_LIBRARY paths. The one in cargo_rustc used "host" version, while the one in cargo_test used "target" version.The original PR changed both to "host", this PR switches both to "target". Is this correct, or should we stick with different environments for building documentation and doctests?