r? anyone
Fix#8057
This commit fixes some oversights in the Makefile where rustc could be
invoked without some of its dependencies yet in place. (I encountered
the problem in practice; its not just theoretical.)
As written in Makefile.in, $(STAGE$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)) is the way one
writes an invocation of rustc where $(1) is the stage number $(2) is
the target triple $(3) is the host triple. (Other uses of the macro
may plug in actual values or different parameters in for those three
formal parameters.)
When you have invocations of $(STAGE...), you need to make sure that
its dependences are satisfied; otherwise, if someone is using `make
-jN` for certain (large-ish) `N`, one can encounter situations where
GNU make attempts to invoke `rustc` before it has actually copied some
of its libraries into place, such as libmorestack.a, which causes a
link failure when the rustc invocation attempts to link in those
libraries.
In this case, the main prerequisite to add is TSREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3),
which is described in Makefile.in as "Prerequisites for using the
stageN compiler to build target artifacts"
----
In addition to adding the extra dependences on TSREQ..., I also
replaced occurrences of the pattern:
TSREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)
$$(TLIB$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3))/$(CFG_STDLIB_$(2))
$$(TLIB$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3))/$(CFG_EXTRALIB_$(2))
with:
SREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)
which is equivalent to the above, as defined in Makefile.in
----
Finally, for the cases where TSREQ was missing in tests.mk, I went
ahead and put in a dependence on SREQ rather than just TSREQ, since it
was not clear to me how one could expect to compile those cases
without stdlib and extralib.
(It could well be that I should have gone ahead and done the same in
other cases where I saw TSREQ was missing, and put SREQ in those
cases as well. But this seemed like a good measure for now, without
needing to tax my understanding of the overall makefile
infrastructure much further.)
Remove directive, if present, from CFG_RUSTC_FLAGS.
Fix#7898.
(One alternative tack is to build up distinct CFG_TEST_RUSTC_FLAGS
alongside CFG_RUSTC_FLAGS; but currently debug is the only --cfg flag
ever added to CFG_RUSTC_FLAGS; the other contents of CFG_RUSTC_FLAGS
are a mix of -Z flags and a few other switches like O, which seem to
make sense to propogate to the tests.)
This should get us over the hump of activating basic ratcheting on codegen tests, at least. It also puts in place optional (disabled by default) ratcheting on all #[bench] tests, and records all metrics from them to harvestable .json files in any case.
This commit fixes some oversights in the Makefile where rustc could be
invoked without some of its dependencies yet in place. (I encountered
the problem in practice; its not just theoretical.)
As written in Makefile.in, $(STAGE$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)) is the way one
writes an invocation of rustc where $(1) is the stage number $(2) is
the target triple $(3) is the host triple. (Other uses of the macro
may plug in actual values or different parameters in for those three
formal parameters.)
When you have invocations of $(STAGE...), you need to make sure that
its dependences are satisfied; otherwise, if someone is using `make
-jN` for certain (large-ish) `N`, one can encounter situations where
GNU make attempts to invoke `rustc` before it has actually copied some
of its libraries into place, such as libmorestack.a, which causes a
link failure when the rustc invocation attempts to link in those
libraries.
In this case, the main prerequisite to add is TSREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3),
which is described in Makefile.in as "Prerequisites for using the
stageN compiler to build target artifacts"
----
In addition to adding the extra dependences on TSREQ..., I also
replaced occurrences of the pattern:
TSREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)
$$(TLIB$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3))/$(CFG_STDLIB_$(2))
$$(TLIB$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3))/$(CFG_EXTRALIB_$(2))
with:
SREQ$(1)_T_$(2)_H_$(3)
which is equivalent to the above, as defined in Makefile.in
----
Finally, for the cases where TSREQ was missing in tests.mk, I went
ahead and put in a dependence on SREQ rather than just TSREQ, since it
was not clear to me how one could expect to compile those cases
without stdlib and extralib.
(It could well be that I should have gone ahead and done the same in
other cases where I saw TSREQ was missing, and put SREQ in those
cases as well. But this seemed like a good measure for now, without
needing to tax my understanding of the overall makefile
infrastructure much further.)
When building Rust libraries (e.g. librustc, libstd, etc), checks for
and verbosely removes previous build products before invoking rustc.
(Also, when Make variable VERBOSE is defined, it will list all of the
libraries matching the object library's glob after the rustc
invocation has completed.)
When installing Rust libraries, checks for previous libraries in
target install directory, but does not remove them.
The thinking behind these two different modes of operation is that the
installation target, unlike the build tree, is not under the control
of this infrastructure and it is not up to this Makefile to decide if
the previous libraries should be removed.
Fixes#3225 (at least in terms of mitigating the multiple library
problem by proactively warning the user about it.)
This is a small follow-up fix to the previous commit: I needed
to quote the right-hand side of the definition for the variable
MATCHES, to handle the case where there are more than one previously
installed libraries in the target directory.
Namely, switched in many places to using GNU make provided functions
for directory listing and text processing, rather than spawning a
shell process to do that work.
In the process of the revision, learned about Target-specific
variables, which were very applicable to INSTALL_LIB (which, on a
per-recipe basis, was always receiving the same actual arguments for
its first two formal parameters in every invocation).
http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Target_002dspecific.html
(We might be able to make use of those in future refactorings.)
----
Also adds a cleanup pass to get-snapshot.py as well, since the same
problem arises when we unpack libraries from the snapshot archive into
a build directory with a prior snapshot's artifacts. (I put this step
into the python script rather than the makefile because I wanted to
delay the cleanup pass until after we have at least successfully
downloaded the tarball. That way, if the download fails, you should
not destroy the previous unarchived snapshot libraries and build
products.)
----
Also reverted whitespace changes to minimize diff.
I plan to put them back in in a dedicated commit elsewhere.
As per https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-July/004685.html
This is the initial machinery to setup the l10n infrastructure for markdown documentation.
A new "docs-l10n" target will take care of generating, updating and then building .pot and .po files, and later on the final .md.
This commit includes the .pot for all current .md docs; they can be feed directly to Mozilla Verbatim if wanted.
Please note that po4a only provides the orig.md -> .pot -> l10n.po -> l10n.md flow. The l10n.md -> l10n.html generation is not currently built in the makefile, as no language has been enabled.
This commit add a new "docs-l10n" make target which uses po4a to:
* create .pot (PO templates) from markdown doc
* update templates and po for enabled languages
* generate translated markdown for completed (> 80%) translations
Currently, no language has been activated.
Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <lucab@debian.org>
When building Rust libraries (e.g. librustc, libstd, etc), checks for
and verbosely removes previous build products before invoking rustc.
(Also, when Make variable VERBOSE is defined, it will list all of the
libraries matching the object library's glob after the rustc
invocation has completed.)
When installing Rust libraries, checks for previous libraries in
target install directory, but does not remove them.
The thinking behind these two different modes of operation is that the
installation target, unlike the build tree, is not under the control
of this infrastructure and it is not up to this Makefile to decide if
the previous libraries should be removed.
This makes it possible for us to trigger the llvm-clean make-target by checking in a change that touches rustllvm/llvm-auto-clean-stamp. Most developers don't need to see or know about this, but when you push a change that "needs an LLVM rebuild", even if not otherwise obvious, this should give a mechanism to do it.
- Fix stat struct for Android (found by SEGV at run-pass/stat.rs)
- Adjust some test cases to rpass for Android
- Modify some script to rpass for Android
