Skip to content

test added #135417

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

test added #135417

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Ganji00
Copy link

@Ganji00 Ganji00 commented Jan 12, 2025

No description provided.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 12, 2025

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @clubby789 (or someone else) some time within the next two weeks.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

  • @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
  • @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) labels Jan 12, 2025
@WaffleLapkin WaffleLapkin removed T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 12, 2025
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@Ganji00 this will not fix #35678 and I am not sure how you believed it would.

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-18 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
#22 exporting to docker image format
#22 sending tarball 27.6s done
#22 DONE 33.6s
##[endgroup]
Setting extra environment values for docker:  --env ENABLE_GCC_CODEGEN=1 --env GCC_EXEC_PREFIX=/usr/lib/gcc/
[CI_JOB_NAME=x86_64-gnu-llvm-18]
debug: `DISABLE_CI_RUSTC_IF_INCOMPATIBLE` configured.
---
sccache: Starting the server...
##[group]Configure the build
configure: processing command line
configure: 
configure: build.configure-args := ['--build=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu', '--llvm-root=/usr/lib/llvm-18', '--enable-llvm-link-shared', '--set', 'rust.randomize-layout=true', '--set', 'rust.thin-lto-import-instr-limit=10', '--enable-verbose-configure', '--enable-sccache', '--disable-manage-submodules', '--enable-locked-deps', '--enable-cargo-native-static', '--set', 'rust.codegen-units-std=1', '--set', 'dist.compression-profile=balanced', '--dist-compression-formats=xz', '--set', 'rust.lld=false', '--disable-dist-src', '--release-channel=nightly', '--enable-debug-assertions', '--enable-overflow-checks', '--enable-llvm-assertions', '--set', 'rust.verify-llvm-ir', '--set', 'rust.codegen-backends=llvm,cranelift,gcc', '--set', 'llvm.static-libstdcpp', '--enable-new-symbol-mangling']
configure: target.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.llvm-config := /usr/lib/llvm-18/bin/llvm-config
configure: llvm.link-shared     := True
configure: rust.randomize-layout := True
configure: rust.thin-lto-import-instr-limit := 10
---
  Downloaded boml v0.3.1
   Compiling boml v0.3.1
   Compiling y v0.1.0 (/checkout/compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc/build_system)
    Finished `release` profile [optimized] target(s) in 4.01s
     Running `/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1-codegen/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/release/y test --use-system-gcc --use-backend gcc --out-dir /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1-tools/cg_gcc --release --mini-tests --std-tests`
Using system GCC
[BUILD] example
[AOT] mini_core_hello_world
/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1-tools/cg_gcc/mini_core_hello_world
abc
---
.........................

failures:

---- core::config::tests::override_toml stdout ----
ERROR: Failed to parse '/does/not/exist': unknown field `exclude`, expected one of `build`, `host`, `target`, `build-dir`, `cargo`, `rustc`, `rustfmt`, `cargo-clippy`, `docs`, `compiler-docs`, `library-docs-private-items`, `docs-minification`, `submodules`, `gdb`, `lldb`, `nodejs`, `npm`, `python`, `reuse`, `locked-deps`, `vendor`, `full-bootstrap`, `bootstrap-cache-path`, `extended`, `tools`, `verbose`, `sanitizers`, `profiler`, `cargo-native-static`, `low-priority`, `configure-args`, `local-rebuild`, `print-step-timings`, `print-step-rusage`, `check-stage`, `doc-stage`, `build-stage`, `test-stage`, `install-stage`, `dist-stage`, `bench-stage`, `patch-binaries-for-nix`, `metrics`, `android-ndk`, `optimized-compiler-builtins`, `jobs`, `compiletest-diff-tool` for key `build` at line 22 column 1
thread 'core::config::tests::override_toml' panicked at /checkout/src/build_helper/src/util.rs:22:9:
status code: 2


@Ganji00
Copy link
Author

Ganji00 commented Jan 13, 2025

@Ganji00 this will not fix #35678 and I am not sure how you believed it would.

hey, i thouht i can make myself a Draft PR
https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/contributing.html#bug-fixes-or-normal-code-changes

i wanted to get familiary with CI and make a TDD apporach where i add a test that fails first and then fix it in next commits. Was that wrong?

@WaffleLapkin
Copy link
Member

@Ganji00 this is a technique you can do. However...

  1. It is generally preferable to test locally first, if possible. CI is running a LOT of things besides what you want to test. So CI is generally run when your local copy works for you.
  2. You did not add a test.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@Ganji00 your branch is named "issue-69329-fix" but this PR cannot possibly be related to issue 69329, as far as I can tell. I'm okay with you trying again, and I'll reassign you to the issue if you open another draft PR with a test. I advise trying to make a minimal test instead of repurposing an existing one that will be testing unrelated things.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants