Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Don't force include Windows goop when documenting #111401

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 10, 2023

Conversation

ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member

Why do we need to include all the windows bits on non-windows platforms? Let's try not doing that.

Possible alternative to #111394, if it works.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 9, 2023

r? @joshtriplett

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels May 9, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 9, 2023

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member Author

x doc --stage 0 std passes locally on Linux so this should be fine.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ rollup=iffy

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 9, 2023

📌 Commit d076607 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 9, 2023
@heiher
Copy link
Contributor

heiher commented May 10, 2023

It works fine for LoongArch. Thank you! ❤️

@ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member Author

Bumping priority because the issue this fixes is affecting a number of tier 3 targets

@bors p=1

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 10, 2023

⌛ Testing commit d076607 with merge cba1407...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 10, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing cba1407 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label May 10, 2023
@bors bors merged commit cba1407 into rust-lang:master May 10, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.71.0 milestone May 10, 2023
@ChrisDenton ChrisDenton deleted the no-windows-allowed branch May 10, 2023 13:14
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (cba1407): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.1% [3.0%, 5.1%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results

This 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.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [2.3%, 3.3%] 7
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 660.093s -> 658.519s (-0.24%)

@uweigand
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like this issue is now fixed on s390x as well - thanks!

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2023
…jubilee

Remove unnecessary `path` attribute

Follow up to rust-lang#111401. I missed this at the time but it should now be totally unnecessary since the other include was removed.

r? `@workingjubilee`
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants