Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error" #75516 #80210

wesleywiser · 2020-12-20T01:57:50Z

Note: I only reverted the two commits in #75516 which made the lint a hard error. I did not revert the other two commits in the PR as they seemed fine to leave IMO (commits 84fcd0d and eb4d6b5).

This reverts commit 5ba9610.

This reverts commit 02eae43.

rust-highfive · 2020-12-20T01:57:54Z

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

Pull requests are usually filed against the master branch for this repo, but this one is against beta. Please double check that you specified the right target!

Mark-Simulacrum · 2020-12-20T02:07:31Z

@bors r+ rollup=never p=1

bors · 2020-12-20T02:07:32Z

📌 Commit f2c8a38 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

rust-log-analyzer · 2020-12-20T02:34:18Z

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-8 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

.................................................................................................... 8900/11099
.................................................................................................... 9000/11099
.................................................................................................... 9100/11099
.......i............................................................................................ 9200/11099
......................................iiiiii..iiiiii.i.............................................. 9300/11099
.................................................................................................... 9500/11099
.................................................................................................... 9600/11099
.................................................................................................... 9700/11099
.................................................................................................... 9800/11099
---
Suite("src/test/codegen") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Codegen" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=codegen mode=codegen (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 229 tests
iiiiiiii......iii...ii..i.ii.........i...........i.............i.............i.i...iii.......iii.... 100/229
......i....i.............i.i.i...iii...iiii....................................ii..i...i..i......... 200/229
....iii.ii...................

 finished in 3.150 seconds
Suite("src/test/codegen-units") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::CodegenUnits" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=codegen-units mode=codegen-units (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
---
Suite("src/test/assembly") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Assembly" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=assembly mode=assembly (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 26 tests
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

 finished in 0.143 seconds
Suite("src/test/incremental") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Incremental" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=incremental mode=incremental (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
---
Suite("src/test/debuginfo") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Debuginfo" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=debuginfo mode=debuginfo (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 116 tests
iiiiiiiiii.i.i..i..i..ii.....ii....ii..........iiii.........i.....i...i.......ii.i.ii.....iiii.....i 100/116
test result: ok. 78 passed; 0 failed; 38 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out

 finished in 2.818 seconds
Suite("src/test/ui-fulldeps") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::UiFullDeps" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
---
   Compiling tempfile v3.1.0
   Compiling serde_json v1.0.59
   Compiling lint-docs v0.1.0 (/checkout/src/tools/lint-docs)
    Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 9.35s
error: failed to test example in lint docs for `missing_fragment_specifier` in /checkout/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs:1231: lint docs should contain the line `### Example`


command did not execute successfully: "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0-tools-bin/lint-docs" "--src" "/checkout/compiler" "--out" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/md-doc/rustc/src/lints" "--rustc" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage2/bin/rustc" "--rustc-target" "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"


failed to run: /checkout/obj/build/bootstrap/debug/bootstrap --stage 2 test --exclude src/tools/tidy
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:32:02

bors · 2020-12-20T03:44:59Z

⌛ Testing commit f2c8a38 with merge 71f9e69c89b63435b3d9ebf6706684140a23e257...

rust-log-analyzer · 2020-12-20T04:08:19Z

The job dist-aarch64-linux failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[RUSTC-TIMING] lint_docs test:false 0.457
    Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 8.03s
[TIMING] ToolBuild { compiler: Compiler { stage: 0, host: TargetSelection { triple: "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu", file: None } }, target: TargetSelection { triple: "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu", file: None }, tool: "lint-docs", path: "src/tools/lint-docs", mode: ToolBootstrap, is_optional_tool: false, source_type: InTree, extra_features: [] } -- 8.047
[TIMING] LintDocs { compiler: Compiler { stage: 0, host: TargetSelection { triple: "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu", file: None } }, target: TargetSelection { triple: "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu", file: None } } -- 0.000
error: failed to test example in lint docs for `missing_fragment_specifier` in /checkout/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs:1231: lint docs should contain the line `### Example`


command did not execute successfully: "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0-tools-bin/lint-docs" "--src" "/checkout/compiler" "--out" "/checkout/obj/build/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/md-doc/rustc/src/lints" "--rustc" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage2/bin/rustc" "--rustc-target" "aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu"


failed to run: /checkout/obj/build/bootstrap/debug/bootstrap dist --host aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu --target aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:18:20

bors · 2020-12-20T04:10:39Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

Mark-Simulacrum · 2020-12-21T02:51:28Z

@bors r+

bors · 2020-12-21T02:51:29Z

📌 Commit 773af1b6ec36ea47cc5327c29ca23ef306c08477 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

rust-log-analyzer · 2020-12-21T03:19:49Z

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-8 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

.................................................................................................... 8900/11099
.................................................................................................... 9000/11099
.................................................................................................... 9100/11099
.......i............................................................................................ 9200/11099
......................................iiiiii..iiiiii.i.............................................. 9300/11099
.................................................................................................... 9500/11099
.................................................................................................... 9600/11099
.................................................................................................... 9700/11099
.................................................................................................... 9800/11099
---
Suite("src/test/codegen") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Codegen" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=codegen mode=codegen (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 229 tests
iiiiiiii......iii...ii..i.ii.........i...........i.............i.............i.i...iii.......iii.... 100/229
......i....i.............i.i.i...iii...iiii.....................................ii.i..i...i......... 200/229
....iii.ii...................

 finished in 3.000 seconds
Suite("src/test/codegen-units") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::CodegenUnits" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=codegen-units mode=codegen-units (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
---
Suite("src/test/assembly") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Assembly" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=assembly mode=assembly (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 26 tests
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

 finished in 0.137 seconds
Suite("src/test/incremental") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Incremental" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=incremental mode=incremental (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
---
Suite("src/test/debuginfo") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::Debuginfo" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
Check compiletest suite=debuginfo mode=debuginfo (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

running 116 tests
iiiiiiiiii.i.i..i....iii....i.i.....ii.........iiii.........i.....i...i.......ii.i.ii.....iiii.....i 100/116
test result: ok. 78 passed; 0 failed; 38 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out

 finished in 2.826 seconds
Suite("src/test/ui-fulldeps") not skipped for "bootstrap::test::UiFullDeps" -- not in ["src/tools/tidy"]
---
   Compiling tempfile v3.1.0
   Compiling serde_json v1.0.59
   Compiling lint-docs v0.1.0 (/checkout/src/tools/lint-docs)
    Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 8.54s
error: failed to test example in lint docs for `missing_fragment_specifier` in /checkout/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs:1231: lint docs should start with the text "The `missing_fragment_specifier` lint" to introduce the lint


command did not execute successfully: "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0-tools-bin/lint-docs" "--src" "/checkout/compiler" "--out" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/md-doc/rustc/src/lints" "--rustc" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage2/bin/rustc" "--rustc-target" "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu"


failed to run: /checkout/obj/build/bootstrap/debug/bootstrap --stage 2 test --exclude src/tools/tidy
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:30:24

Mark-Simulacrum · 2020-12-21T03:41:14Z

@bors r-

(But please reapprove once things are working, or ping me on Zulip and I can drive this to conclusion).

wesleywiser · 2020-12-21T18:42:21Z

I'm having issue running this locally so we should wait until CI is green before r+'ing again.

wesleywiser · 2020-12-21T19:30:36Z

Seems that did it!

@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum

bors · 2020-12-21T19:30:37Z

📌 Commit 483668b has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

bors · 2020-12-21T22:09:11Z

⌛ Testing commit 483668b with merge 0d24b4260d227ccef37e1be8e776320ef0e287b0...

bors · 2020-12-22T00:20:06Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

rust-log-analyzer · 2020-12-22T00:20:06Z

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

wesleywiser · 2020-12-22T02:33:25Z

@Mark-Simulacrum any idea why this failed? I can't seem to access the log for the failed builder.

Mark-Simulacrum · 2020-12-22T02:55:04Z

@bors retry

I think the self hosted runners sometimes just die midbuild.

bors · 2020-12-22T03:41:05Z

⌛ Testing commit 483668b with merge b0dc3c6...

bors · 2020-12-22T06:36:14Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing b0dc3c6 to beta...

This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3]. Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again. [1]: rust-lang#75516 [2]: rust-lang#80210 [3]: rust-lang#128006

…unconditional, r=<try> [crater] Make `missing_fragment_specifier` an unconditional error This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3]. Experiment with turning missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again. More context: rust-lang#128006 [1]: rust-lang#75516 [2]: rust-lang#80210 [3]: rust-lang#128006

This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3]. Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again. [1]: rust-lang#75516 [2]: rust-lang#80210 [3]: rust-lang#128006

…unconditional, r=<try> [crater] Make `missing_fragment_specifier` an unconditional error This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3]. Experiment with turning missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again. More context: rust-lang#128006 [1]: rust-lang#75516 [2]: rust-lang#80210 [3]: rust-lang#128006

This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3]. Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again. [1]: rust-lang#75516 [2]: rust-lang#80210 [3]: rust-lang#128006

wesleywiser added 2 commits December 19, 2020 20:50

Revert "Remove missing_fragment_specifier lint"

4a463d9

This reverts commit 5ba9610.

Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error"

f2c8a38

This reverts commit 02eae43.

rust-highfive assigned Mark-Simulacrum Dec 20, 2020

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Dec 20, 2020

Mark-Simulacrum added beta-accepted Accepted for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. beta-nominated Nominated for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. labels Dec 20, 2020

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 Dec 20, 2020

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 20, 2020

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 Dec 21, 2020

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 21, 2020

Add example to lint docs

483668b

wesleywiser force-pushed the beta_backport branch from 773af1b to 483668b Compare December 21, 2020 18:44

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 21, 2020

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 22, 2020

Mark-Simulacrum removed beta-accepted Accepted for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. beta-nominated Nominated for backporting to the compiler in the beta channel. labels Dec 22, 2020

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 Dec 22, 2020

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 22, 2020

bors merged commit b0dc3c6 into rust-lang:beta Dec 22, 2020

rustbot added this to the 1.49.0 milestone Dec 22, 2020

fmease mentioned this pull request Mar 9, 2024

Tracking issue for future-incompatibility lint missing_fragment_specifier #40107

Open

tgross35 mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2024

Make missing_fragment_specifier an unconditional error #128425

Open

Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error" #75516 #80210

Revert "Promote missing_fragment_specifier to hard error" #75516 #80210

Uh oh!

Conversation

wesleywiser commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

rust-highfive commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

Mark-Simulacrum commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

rust-log-analyzer commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

rust-log-analyzer commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 20, 2020

Uh oh!

Mark-Simulacrum commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

rust-log-analyzer commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

Mark-Simulacrum commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

wesleywiser commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

wesleywiser commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 21, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

rust-log-analyzer commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

wesleywiser commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

Mark-Simulacrum commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 22, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!