bootstrap: Add more comments to some of the test steps
Some of the test steps have names that don't clearly indicate what they actually do.
While there is ongoing experimental work to actually rename the steps (e.g. #135071), that's dependent on figuring out what the new names should actually be. In the meantime, we can still improve things by adding comments to help describe the steps, which will remain useful even after any renaming.
Include rustc and rustdoc book in replace-version-placeholder
This PR includes the *(stable)* rustc and rustdoc books which might contain `CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION` that should be replaced when branching beta. Include them so they are not forgotten.
I didn't include any other folder or books as they don't strike me as relevant for it and might be problematic in the future if some of the submodules are turned into subtree, because we have places where we wouldn't want to replace them.
cf. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135163#issuecomment-2574694931
cc `@pietroalbini`
Add new `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-gnu` targets
These are in symmetry with `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-msvc`.
> ## Tier 3 target policy
>
> At this tier, the Rust project provides no official support for a target, so we
> place minimal requirements on the introduction of targets.
>
> A proposed new tier 3 target must be reviewed and approved by a member of the
> compiler team based on these requirements. The reviewer may choose to gauge
> broader compiler team consensus via a [Major Change Proposal (MCP)][https://forge.rust-lang.org/compiler/mcp.html].
>
> A proposed target or target-specific patch that substantially changes code
> shared with other targets (not just target-specific code) must be reviewed and
> approved by the appropriate team for that shared code before acceptance.
>
> - A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target
> maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target.
> (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
This is me, `@tbu-` on github.
> - Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a
> target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same
> name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and
> naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust
> (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to
> diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially
> once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important
> even for a tier 3 target.
> - Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless
> absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if
> the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect
> beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to
> disambiguate it.
> - If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
> Periods (`.`) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
Consistent with `{x86_64,i686}-win7-windows-msvc`, see also #118150.
> - Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not
> create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for
> Rust developers or users.
> - The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> - Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust
> license (`MIT OR Apache-2.0`).
> - The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other
> host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend
> on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This
> applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding
> new license exceptions (as specified by the `tidy` tool in the
> rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library
> or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a
> user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be
> subject to any new license requirements.
> - Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other
> code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling
> from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries.
> Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime
> libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications
> built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code
> generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require
> such libraries at all. For instance, `rustc` built for the target may
> depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library,
> but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code
> optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the
> Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the
> scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
> - "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous"
> legal/licensing terms include but are *not* limited to: non-disclosure
> requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements
> (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms,
> requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular
> Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability
> for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that
> adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its
> developers or users.
AFAICT, it's the same legal situation as the tier 1 `{x86_64,i686}-pc-windows-gnu`.
> - Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any
> binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving
> Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or
> employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their
> decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval
> decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise
> participate in discussions.
> - This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being
> cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or
> maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a
> developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not
> face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely
> exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves
> subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Understood.
> - Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries
> as possible and appropriate (`core` for most targets, `alloc` for targets
> that can support dynamic memory allocation, `std` for targets with an
> operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but
> may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as
> appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or
> challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to
> avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3
> target not implementing those portions.
This target supports the whole libstd surface, since it's essentially reusing all of the x86_64-pc-windows-gnu target. Understood.
> - The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how
> to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target
> supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the
> documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target,
> using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
I tried to write some documentation on that.
> - Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or
> other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular,
> do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a
> block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or
> notifications (via any medium, including via ``@`)` to a PR author or others
> involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into
> such messages.
> - Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to
> an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within
> reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not
> generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested
> such notifications.
Understood.
> - Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2
> or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without
> approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3
> target.
> - In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets,
> such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid
> introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the
> target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as
> appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
> - Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of
> rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork
> of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
Understood.
> If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers
> no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and
> has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality
> of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed
> to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously
> worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
>
Understood.
r? compiler-team
Revert #131365
This PR reverts #131365, following the revert we did on the beta branches for both 1.84 and 1.85.
While the PR passes CI successfully on master, as soon as we branch off beta it starts failing in the newly created beta branch. This caused the release team to revert it for both 1.84 and 1.85, and if nothing is done it would continue being reverted every cycle.
`@heiseish` (PR author) feel free to submit the PR again in the future: this revert doesn't represent the release team rejecting your change, but just a (hopefully temporary!) revert to ensure future beta branches can be created without reverting it each time.
When submitting the PR again, I recommend you test your changes by configuring `rust.channel` to both `nightly` and `beta` in your `config.toml`. You can see the latest failure [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135163#issuecomment-2576373995).
rustfmt: drop nightly-gating of the `--style-edition` flag registration
Follow-up to [Stabilize `style_edition = "2024"` in-tree #134929](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134929).
#134929 un-nightly-gated the *read* of `--style-edition`, but didn't also un-nightly-gate the *registration*/*declaration* of the `--style-edition` flag itself. Reading `--style-edition` on a non-nightly channel (e.g. beta) will thus panic because `--style-edition` is never declared.
This PR also un-nightly-gates the registration. Not sure how to write a regression test for this, because this *requires* the non-nightly / beta channel. Though existing tests do fail (albeit indirectly).
Checking if this fixes the panic against beta in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135197.
r? rustfmt
rustdoc: use stable paths as preferred canonical paths
This accomplishes something like 16a4ad7d7b, but with the `rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules` attribute instead of the path length.
Fixes#131676
Avoid naming variables `str`
This renames variables named `str` to other names, to make sure `str`
always refers to a type.
It's confusing to read code where `str` (or another standard type name)
is used as an identifier. It also produces misleading syntax
highlighting.
don't bless `proc_macro_deps.rs` unless it's necessary
Running tidy with `--bless` flag is breaking the build cache as tidy updates mtime of `proc_macro_deps.rs` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134865) unconditionally and that leads cargo to recompile tidy.
This patch fixes that.
This renames variables named `str` to other names, to make sure `str`
always refers to a type.
It's confusing to read code where `str` (or another standard type name)
is used as an identifier. It also produces misleading syntax
highlighting.
Running tidy with `--bless` flag is breaking the build cache as tidy updates mtime
of `proc_macro_deps.rs` unconditionally and that leads cargo to recompile tidy.
This patch fixes that.
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
Avoid replacing the definition of `CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION`
Before this PR, replace-version-placeholder hardcoded the path defining CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION (to avoid replacing it). After a refactor moved the file defining it without changing the hardcoded path, the tool started replacing the constant itself with the version number.
To avoid this from happening in the future, this changes the definition of the constant to avoid the tool from ever matching it.
r? `@workingjubilee`
By default, jemalloc is built to only support the same page size as the
host machine. For AArch64 targets, set an env variable so that jemalloc
is built with support for page sizes up to 64K regardless of the host machine.
rustdoc: Fix mismatched capitalization in sidebar
Previously, the main content used "Aliased Type", while the sidebar said "Aliased type". Now, they both say "Aliased Type", which is the more common capitalization in Rustdoc.
See the following link for an example.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.83.0/std/io/type.Result.html
Add support for wasm exception handling to Emscripten target
This is a draft because we need some additional setting for the Emscripten target to select between the old exception handling and the new exception handling. I don't know how to add a setting like that, would appreciate advice from Rust folks. We could maybe choose to use the new exception handling if `Ctarget-feature=+exception-handling` is passed? I tried this but I get errors from llvm so I'm not doing it right.
Previously, the main content used "Aliased Type", while the sidebar said
"Aliased type". Now, they both say "Aliased Type", which is the more common
capitalization in Rustdoc.
See the following link for an example.
https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.83.0/std/io/type.Result.html
Before this commit, replace-version-placeholder hardcoded the path
defining CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION (to avoid replacing it). After a refactor
moved the file defining it without changing the hardcoded path, the tool
started replacing the constant itself with the version number.
To avoid this from happening in the future, this changes the definition
of the constant to avoid the tool from ever matching it.
