You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Auto merge of #137036 - jieyouxu:drivers-license, r=Kobzol
Include version number of libs being built in cargo lib metadata (esp. `librustc_driver*.so`)
Previously, on a non-stable channel, it's possible for two builds from different versioned sources (e.g. 1.84.0 vs 1.84.1) to produce a `librustc_driver*.so` with the same filename hashes. This causes problems with side-by-side installs wrt. linker search paths because 1.84.1 rustc bin and 1.84.0 rustc bin may try to link to the "same" `librustc_driver*.so` (same filename hash) but fail because the contents of the so is actually different.
We try to mitigate this by including the version number of artifacts being built via `__CARGO_DEFAULT_LIB_METADATA` (kind of an ugly hack, but I don't think cargo has a way for us to tell cargo to use a package version override).
Fixes#136701 (mitigates, really).
### Testing
Tested manually[^host] by:
```bash
$ cat src/version
1.86.0
$ ./x build library # w/ compiler profile, (non-stable) dev channel
$ lddtree build/host/stage1/bin/rustc
rustc => build/host/stage1/bin/rustc (interpreter => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2)
librustc_driver-ea1b1b2291881cc4.so => build/host/stage1/bin/../lib/librustc_driver-ea1b1b2291881cc4.so
[...]
```
and observing that changing `src/version` to bump a point release causes `librustc_driver*.so` to have a different hash while sources are unmodified otherwise.
```bash
$ cat src/version
1.86.1
$ ./x build library # w/ compiler profile, (non-stable) dev channel
$ lddtree build/host/stage1/bin/rustc
rustc => build/host/stage1/bin/rustc (interpreter => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2)
librustc_driver-746badadbcb74721.so => build/host/stage1/bin/../lib/librustc_driver-746badadbcb74721.so
[...]
```
cc `@clan` `@demize` could you check that if you backport this change against 1.84.{0,1} as reported in #136701, that the produced `rustc` binary works, under the context of the Gentoo build system setup?
[^host]: on a `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` host, no cross
0 commit comments