Sadly, there's a lack of resources for maintaining the `rust` tool,
and we decided in the 2013-10-08 Rust team meeting that it's better
to remove it altogether than to leave it in a broken state.
This deletion is without prejudice. If a person or people appear who
would like to maintain the tool, we will probably be happy to
resurrect it!
Closes#9775
Removes old rustdoc, moves rustdoc_ng into its place instead (plus drops the _ng
suffix). Also shreds all reference to rustdoc_ng from the Makefile rules.
Many people will be very confused that their debug! statements aren't working
when they first use rust only to learn that they should have been building with
`--cfg debug` the entire time. This inverts the meaning of the flag to instead
of enabling debug statements, now it disables debug statements.
This way the default behavior is a bit more reasonable, and requires less
end-user configuration. Furthermore, this turns on debug by default when
building the rustc compiler.
Now rustdoc_ng will be built as both a binary and a library (using the same
rules as all the other binaries that rust has). Furthermore, this will also
start building rustdoc_ng unit tests (and running them).
`stdtest` and `extratest` expects to be able to write to `tmp` directory under the current working directory, so the first commit creates `tmp` directory and changes the directory before running tests.
The second commit adds `--bench` argument to test runs and copies metrics from the remote device.
r? @graydon Also, notably, make rustpkgtest depend on the rustpkg executable (otherwise, tests that shell out to rustpgk might run when rustpkg doesn't exist).
Get rid of special cases for names beginning with "rust-" or
containing hyphens, and just store a Path in a package ID. The Rust-identifier
for the crate is none of rustpkg's business.
This commit allows you to write:
extern mod x = "a/b/c";
which means rustc will search in the RUST_PATH for a package with
ID a/b/c, and bind it to the name `x` if it's found.
Incidentally, move get_relative_to from back::rpath into std::path
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 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.)
Most of the relevant information can be found in the commit messages.
r? @brson - I just wanted to make sure the make changes aren't completely bogus
This would close#2400, #6517, and #6489 (although a run through incoming-full on linux would have to confirm the latter two)
This way a cross-compiled rustc's answer to host_triple() is correct. The return
value of host_triple() reflects the actual host triple that the compiler was
build for, not the triple the compiler is being built on