-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove libc from more tests #124072
Remove libc from more tests #124072
Conversation
r? @davidtwco rustbot has assigned @davidtwco. Use |
Thanks for the cleanups 💚 |
…=jieyouxu Remove libc from more tests The goal here is to trim down the number of tests that depend on libc from the sysroot to make rust-lang#123938 more plausible. This PR is a few simple cases that I missed in rust-lang#123943.
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#124041 (Fix copy path button) - rust-lang#124047 (Match ergonomics 2024: miscellaneous code cleanups) - rust-lang#124064 (Move confusing comment about otherwise blocks in `lower_match_tree`) - rust-lang#124072 (Remove libc from more tests) - rust-lang#124090 (llvm: update riscv target feature to match LLVM 19) - rust-lang#124100 (fix: make `str::from_raw_parts_mut` `mut`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Oops, sorry |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (0e15f5e): comparison URL. Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. CyclesResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 677.567s -> 676.731s (-0.12%) |
The goal here is to trim down the number of tests that depend on libc from the sysroot to make #123938 more plausible.
This PR is a few simple cases that I missed in #123943.