-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
[beta] Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error #75516" #77456
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
Conversation
Updates src/tools/cargo. cc @ehuss |
@Mark-Simulacrum: no appropriate reviewer found, use r? to override |
|
That looks like a false positive from the update (well, revert) of cargotest, so can be ignored. |
@bors r+ rollup=never |
📌 Commit 2b214e6 has been approved by |
Yea, I've been meaning to fix that (rust-lang/highfive#253). |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure |
…chenkov [beta] Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error rust-lang#75516" This reverts "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error rust-lang#75516" on just beta. I would like us to explore a more principled fix, perhaps along the lines `@petrochenkov` suggested in rust-lang#76605, on master when we have more time to test it but I don't want us shipping the breakage in the meantime. I don't personally feel comfortable immediately backporting anything more than a revert here. cc `@matklad` This matches rust-lang#77456 for 1.47 but targets 1.48 (current beta) instead. r? `@petrochenkov`
This reverts "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error #75516" on just beta. I would like us to explore a more principled fix, perhaps along the lines @petrochenkov suggested in #76605, on master when we have more time to test it but I don't want us shipping the breakage in the meantime. I don't personally feel comfortable immediately backporting anything more than a revert here.
cc @matklad