Add a description of Cargo.lock conflicts in the Cargo FAQ#12092
Add a description of Cargo.lock conflicts in the Cargo FAQ#12092heisen-li wants to merge 6 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Cargo.lock conflicts in the Cargo FAQ#12092Conversation
|
r? @weihanglo (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
weihanglo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks!
I am not certain if we can add that message unconditionally. Most of the common dependency conflicts cannot be resolved by cargo generate-lockfile. I didn't think much when writing down the fix. Can you help me think of any scenario where the suggestion is considered harmful or useless?
|
BTW I am more looking forward to an FAQ though it might be wordy and not easy to write one. |
|
Thank you for your guidance. For now, I've modified some of the test cases to make it pass. Perhaps, as you say, for some scenarios that require more in-depth analysis, I'll go ahead with the work. Oh, I'm going to try to add answers to the frequently asked questions, which may be a bit difficult for me to satisfy everyone, but I'll do my best. |
…o lock-conflict * 'master' of https://github.com/QiangHeisenberg/cargo: (148 commits) doc: intra-doc links and doc comments for build script Adding a member should check with moderation. Leader selection with no objections. Remove useless drop of copy type Update comment to add more context. Fix dep/feat syntax with hidden implicit optional dependencies changelog: add entries of some behavior changes Update the semver-check script to be able to run in any directory. Clarify unsafe to safe function qualifier change. Fix typo Do not take a stance on #![deny(warnings)] Note that it is not a breaking change to make an `unsafe` function safe Change to <bin-name> Update libc to 0.2.144 Add more documentation for artifact-dependencies. Add missing period. Disallow RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN in the [env] table. Add a comment describing why these are disallowed. Disallow RUSTUP_HOME in the [env] table. Update git2 ...
|
Allow me to explain a little bit. As you said, it may not be appropriate to use the order aaaa suggested in the error message. I described some scenarios in PR, hope my understanding is correct. If I understand something wrong or explain it not clearly enough, I hope you can point it out. |
Cargo.lock conflicts in the Cargo FAQ
src/doc/src/faq.md
Outdated
| or merging branches, it is recommended to try to run `cargo generate-lockfile` to | ||
| solve it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I personally wouldn't recommend this. cargo generate-lockfile will update all dependencies, which is usually not what is wanted.
I think most conflicts can be trivially resolved manually. The format is not that complicated, and editing manually shouldn't be such a concern.
I would say that if there are non-trivial conflicts, you can reset all "yours" changes, fix all other conflicts in the branch, and then run some cargo command (like cargo tree or cargo check), which should re-update the lockfile with your own local changes. If you previously ran some cargo update commands in your branch, you can re-run them that this time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think most conflicts can be trivially resolved manually. The format is not that complicated, and editing manually shouldn't be such a concern.
Even fairly familiar with cargo, I do not attempt to resolve conflicts on my own
I would say that if there are non-trivial conflicts, you can reset all "yours" changes, fix all other conflicts in the branch, and then run some cargo command (like cargo tree or cargo check), which should re-update the lockfile with your own local change
This is what I do to resolve conflicts
weihanglo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you! I think it's pretty good enough. Just some minor issues need to resolve and then we can move forward. We can always polish it afterward.
|
Thank you very much for your guidance. If I still have mistakes, please feel free to point them out, and I will take the time to modify them：） |
weihanglo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Before merging this, @qiangheisenberg could you do a squash or else to make the git history more meaningful?
|
Okay. I meant there are 6 commits in the history and some of them seem irrelevant or misleading, e.g., "Merge branch master". It is a good practice to keep the history clean. Anyhow, I'll merge this sooner or later if you haven't got time to cleanup git commits. Thank you! |
Very sorry for my unprofessional manner. I'm not very good at dealing with this problem, so I had to re-open a PR. |
What does this PR try to resolve?
Add a message for issue #12079.
I haven't figured out how to add a new entry to the Cargo FAQ yet. If it does need to be added, I will add it later.