Closed
Bug 1502964
Opened 6 years ago
Closed 5 years ago
vendor winapi crate with aarch64 support
Categories
(Firefox Build System :: General, enhancement)
Firefox Build System
General
Tracking
(firefox65 fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla65
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox65 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: froydnj, Assigned: froydnj)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 2 obsolete files)
2.57 KB,
patch
|
froydnj
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.70 MB,
patch
|
froydnj
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The upstream pull request: https://github.com/retep998/winapi-rs/pull/677 that adds aarch64 support has been merged. From conversations with the maintainer, it's not clear to me when an updated crate version with those changes will be released. Until that time, we're just going to have to redirect to our own copy of winapi-rs
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
Pulling this change out separately so it's easier to review.
Attachment #9020895 -
Flags: review?(core-build-config-reviews)
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
It's not clear when upstream will do a new release with the aarch64 changes we need, so to unblock ourselves, let's just use a forked version for now.
Attachment #9020896 -
Flags: review?(core-build-config-reviews)
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9020895 [details] [diff] [review] part 1 - tweak vendoring for pulling in winapi from a git repo branch Review of attachment 9020895 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- This sucks. :-/ Can we get a followup bug to track updating to the next winapi release (whenever that happens) so we can remove this?
Attachment #9020895 -
Flags: review?(core-build-config-reviews) → review+
Updated•6 years ago
|
Attachment #9020896 -
Flags: review?(core-build-config-reviews) → review+
Pushed by nfroyd@mozilla.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/6015a119c154 part 1 - tweak vendoring for pulling in winapi from a git repo branch; r=ted.mielczarek https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/26815a566707 part 2 - update winapi to froydnj/winapi-rs#aarch64; r=ted.mielczarek
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
Backed out 2 changesets (Bug 1502964) for build bustages CLOSED TREE Push with failures: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=mozilla-inbound&resultStatus=testfailed%2Cbusted%2Cexception&classifiedState=unclassified&selectedJob=208896362&revision=26815a566707e4223602f2ae3d87ac0ad5caa22f Failure log: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer.html#?job_id=208896362&repo=mozilla-inbound Backout: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/a10a2a249464f7d43fb59d42007f3bb0acdfa456
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
Ugh, it looks like cargo really does checksum all the files we deleted: error: failed to calculate checksum of: Z:\build\build\src\third_party\rust\winapi\x86_64/lib/libwinapi_imagehlp.a so we'd have to solve https://github.com/alexcrichton/cargo-vendor/issues/137, which asks cargo-vendor to honor [package.include], and we'd have to figure out how to make cargo-vendor determine which paths can be excluded as vendored crates (not filed).
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•6 years ago
|
||
OK, ideally https://github.com/alexcrichton/cargo-vendor/pull/139 will be accepted and we'll get a new cargo-vendor release, and we can try this again with fewer hacks.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
That revision landed (yay!), but it turns out there was a regression in an earlier version that caused `cargo vendor` to fail (boo!). That issue is being tracked at https://github.com/alexcrichton/cargo-vendor/issues/140, and we'll see if that can be fixed easily.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•5 years ago
|
||
The newer version features the usual crop of bugfixes we need. Ted OK'd this on IRC, but this change also means that other people who want to vendor things won't run into weird bugs, and we don't have to include the vendor_rust.py hacks (which didn't actually work...) that I had proposed previously.
Attachment #9022125 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Attachment #9020895 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•5 years ago
|
||
This vendoring is a little more invasive, but that's because the rules for what cargo-vendor includes have changed, so other crates are affected as well.
Attachment #9022126 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Attachment #9020896 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment 11•5 years ago
|
||
Pushed by nfroyd@mozilla.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/225f2ad3cf2f part 1 - bump the minimum required version of cargo-vendor; r=ted.mielczarek https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/12bca041cda6 part 2 - update winapi to froydnj/winapi-rs#aarch64; r=ted.mielczarek
Comment 12•5 years ago
|
||
Backed out 2 changesets (Bug 1502964) for spidermonkey bustages. CLOSED TREE Push with failures: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=mozilla-inbound&resultStatus=testfailed%2Cbusted%2Cexception%2Cusercancel%2Crunnable&revision=12bca041cda6d2cf14e6d4384703c022237de5bf Failure log: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/logviewer.html#?job_id=209431781&repo=mozilla-inbound Backout push: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=mozilla-inbound&resultStatus=testfailed%2Cbusted%2Cexception%2Cusercancel%2Crunnable&revision=1692e4521fb02df4731f49fab493142af7e94f2d
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Comment 13•5 years ago
|
||
Pushed by nfroyd@mozilla.com: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/088cccfcaa08 part 1 - bump the minimum required version of cargo-vendor; r=ted.mielczarek https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/d229433e0f47 part 2 - update winapi to froydnj/winapi-rs#aarch64; r=ted.mielczarek
Comment 14•5 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/088cccfcaa08 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/d229433e0f47
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 5 years ago
status-firefox65:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla65
Comment 15•5 years ago
|
||
Thanks very much, Nathan! I can now build a clean tree (modulo the known issues in webrtc). This is going to make my trees much more sane.
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•