cargo package: overwrite existing tarballs #2828
Conversation
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
Woops sry for the messy diff, I accidently ran rustfmt over this. If that is a problem, I can try to clean up the patch and remove unnecessary re-formats. |
|
Ah yeah could the rustfmt bits be backed out for now? Also, can you be sure to add a test for this as well? |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #2759) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
Added tests and removed rustfmt changes, currently validating rebase onto updated master. |
Previously, cargo package did not do anything if a tarball already existed. This is wrong, because the source may have changed and cargo does not do any dependency tracking for package tarballs yet, so it did not notice this. This commit changes cargo package to always overwrite existing tarballs, which works fine until proper dependency tracking is implemented. Fixes #2799
|
Ok, should be good to merge now. |
cargo package: overwrite existing tarballs Previously, cargo package did not do anything if a tarball already existed. This is wrong, because the source may have changed and cargo does not do any dependency tracking for package tarballs yet, so it did not notice this. This commit changes cargo package to always overwrite existing tarballs, which works fine until proper dependency tracking is implemented. Fixes #2799
|
☀️ Test successful - cargo-cross-linux, cargo-linux-32, cargo-linux-64, cargo-mac-32, cargo-mac-64, cargo-win-gnu-32, cargo-win-gnu-64, cargo-win-msvc-32, cargo-win-msvc-64 |
Previously, cargo package did not do anything if a tarball already
existed. This is wrong, because the source may have changed and cargo
does not do any dependency tracking for package tarballs yet, so it did
not notice this.
This commit changes cargo package to always overwrite existing tarballs,
which works fine until proper dependency tracking is implemented.
Fixes #2799