Fixes for -g handling #24945
Merged
Fixes for -g handling #24945
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Then, decouple the question of whether the compiler/stdlib carry debuginfo (which is controlled via `--enable-debuginfo` and implied by `--enable-debug`) from the question of whether the tests carry debuginfo (which now no longer is implied by `--enable-debug` nor `--enable-debuginfo`, and is off by default).
|
r? @huonw (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
Could you add a test that explicitly passes itself |
|
@alexcrichton good idea, will do |
|
Does it make sense to also follow up on #24932 (comment) in this PR? |
|
@tamird I'll do that separately; I want to land this on its own rather than let them get tangled. |
pnkfelix
force-pushed
the
fixes-for-dash-g-handling
branch
from
c332115 to
df82df8
Compare
pnkfelix
added a commit
to pnkfelix/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2015
Note it is safe, with respect to autobuilds, to land before rust-lang#24945. (In other words, landing this sooner won't break things for anyone any worse than they were already broken, since there are *other* tests that also add `-g` to their flags via `compile-flags: -g`.)
alexcrichton
added a commit
to alexcrichton/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2015
Fixes for -g handling First: * decouples our handling of `-g` for the test suite from our handling of `-g` for the rest of the compiler/stdlib building. * Namely, if you do `--enable-debug` or `--enable-debuginfo`, that should only affect `rustc` and the standard library crates; the tests should all continue to compile without `-g` unless: * you pass `--enable-debuginfo-tests`, or * the test itself requests the `-g` option (e.g. via a `// compile-flags: -g` embedded comment). Second: * Makes `rustc` more flexible in that it now accepts multiple occurrences of `-g -g` * (as a drive-by, I gave `-O` the same treatment: multiple occurrences of `-O` are treated as synonymous as a single occurrence of `-O`. Fix rust-lang#24937
alexcrichton
added a commit
to alexcrichton/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2015
…24687-test Add `-g` (to testcase) that I should have included in PR rust-lang#24932. Note it is safe, with respect to autobuilds, to land before rust-lang#24945. (In other words, landing this sooner won't break things for anyone any worse than they were already broken, since there are *other* tests that also add `-g` to their flags via `compile-flags: -g`.)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes for -g handling
First:
-gfor the test suite from our handling of-gfor the rest of the compiler/stdlib building.--enable-debugor--enable-debuginfo, that should only affectrustcand the standard library crates; the tests should all continue to compile without-gunless:--enable-debuginfo-tests, or-goption (e.g. via a// compile-flags: -gembedded comment).Second:
rustcmore flexible in that it now accepts multiple occurrences of-g -g-Othe same treatment: multiple occurrences of-Oare treated as synonymous as a single occurrence of-O.Fix #24937