Skip to content

Rollup of 2 pull requests#152219

Closed
JonathanBrouwer wants to merge 7 commits intorust-lang:mainfrom
JonathanBrouwer:rollup-t6J7DOs
Closed

Rollup of 2 pull requests#152219
JonathanBrouwer wants to merge 7 commits intorust-lang:mainfrom
JonathanBrouwer:rollup-t6J7DOs

Conversation

@JonathanBrouwer
Copy link
Contributor

Successful merges:

r? @ghost

Create a similar rollup

jyn514 and others added 7 commits January 31, 2026 20:06
Some history about `paths()`. The original intent Mark-Simulacrum had
when he introduced PathSet, to my knowledge, was that multiple paths
could be aliases for the same step. That's what rustdoc is doing; both
paths for rustdoc run exactly the same Step, regardless of whether one
or both are present.

That never really caught on. To my knowledge, rustdoc is the only usage
of paths() there's ever been.

Later, in 95503, I repurposed PathSet to mean "each crate in this set
should be passed to Step::make_run in RunConfig". That was not the
previous meaning.

Rustdoc never looks at run.paths in make_run, so it's safe to just treat
it as an alias, like elsewhere in bootstrap. Same for all the other tool
steps.

Co-authored-by: Tshepang Mbambo <hopsi@tuta.io>
…, r=davidtwco

cmse: don't use `BackendRepr` when checking return type

tracking issue: rust-lang#81391
tracking issue: rust-lang#75835

r? davidtwco
cc @RalfJung

context: rust-lang/rfcs#3884 (comment)

I believe this is more reliable, and no longer relies on `BackendRepr`. I also added a test specifically for using `repr(Rust)`.
bootstrap: Remove `ShouldRun::paths`

Split out from rust-lang#151930. I've copied my comment in rust-lang#151930 (comment) into the commit description.

r? @Zalathar cc @Mark-Simulacrum @Kobzol

---

Some history about `paths()`. The original intent @Mark-Simulacrum had
when he introduced PathSet in rust-lang@f104b12, to my knowledge, was that multiple paths
could be aliases for the same step. That's what rustdoc is doing; both
paths for rustdoc run exactly the same Step, regardless of whether one
or both are present.

That never really caught on. To my knowledge, rustdoc is the only usage
of paths() there's ever been.

Later, in rust-lang#95503, I repurposed PathSet to mean "each crate in this set
should be passed to Step::make_run in RunConfig". That was not the
previous meaning.

Rustdoc never looks at run.paths in make_run, so it's safe to just treat
it as an alias, like elsewhere in bootstrap. Same for all the other tool
steps.
@rust-bors rust-bors bot added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Feb 6, 2026
@rustbot rustbot added A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Feb 6, 2026
@JonathanBrouwer
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Feb 6, 2026

📌 Commit 731ab4c has been approved by JonathanBrouwer

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot 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 Feb 6, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants