test: mirgate fix* and future_incompat_report to snapbox by eth3lbert · Pull Request #14173 · rust-lang/cargo

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T19:59:24Z

What does this PR try to resolve?

Part of #14039.

Migrate following to snapbox:

tests/testsuite/fix.rs
tests/testsuite/fix_n_times.rs
tests/testsuite/future_incompat_report.rs

rustbot · 2024-06-30T19:59:29Z

rustbot has assigned @weihanglo.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:32:14Z

tests/testsuite/fix.rs

    p.cargo("fix").cwd("src").run();
 }

+#[allow(deprecated)]


with_stderr_does_not_contain is being used in this function.

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:33:32Z

tests/testsuite/fix.rs

        .run();
 }

+#[allow(deprecated)]


with_stderr_does_not_contain is being used in this function.

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:34:01Z

tests/testsuite/future_incompat_report.rs

        .run();
 }

+#[allow(deprecated)]


with_stderr_does_not_contain is being used in this function.

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:34:24Z

tests/testsuite/future_incompat_report.rs

    }
 }

+#[allow(deprecated)]


with_stderr_does_not_contain is being used in this function

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:35:02Z

tests/testsuite/future_incompat_report.rs

    assert_eq!(lines.next(), None);
 }

+#[allow(deprecated)]


with_stdout_does_not_contain is being used in this function.

eth3lbert · 2024-06-30T20:40:37Z

tests/testsuite/fix.rs

    p.cargo("fix --edition --allow-no-vcs")
-        .with_stderr_contains("[CHECKING] foo [..]")
-        .with_stderr_contains(&format!(
-            "\
-[WARNING] `src/lib.rs` is already on the latest edition ({latest_stable}), unable to migrate further
-",
-            latest_stable = latest_stable
-        ))
+        .with_stderr_data(str![])
        .run();


I'm not sure why this isn't being overwritten. Is this fix even running?

No. I think we can add deprecated and leave off for now.

cargo/tests/testsuite/fix.rs

Lines 881 to 885 in c7cb45c

edition = '{}'

"#,

latest_stable

),

)

weihanglo · 2024-07-01T23:46:35Z

tests/testsuite/fix.rs

+        .with_stderr_data(str![[r#"
+...
+[FIXED] src/lib.rs ([..] fixes)
+...
+"#]])
+        .with_stderr_data(


Why do you need two separate assertions?

Also mind the plurality. Maybe ([..] fix[..])?

Oh, I forgot to mention this! It sometimes generate two entries:

1 1 | [COMPILING] foo v0.0.1 ([ROOT]/foo) 2 2 | [FIXED] build.rs (1 fix) 3 3 | [FIXED] src/main.rs (1 fix) 4 4 | [FIXED] examples/foo.rs (1 fix) 5 5 | [FIXED] tests/a.rs (1 fix) 6 6 | [FIXED] src/lib.rs ([..]fix[..]) 7 7 | [FINISHED] `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in [ELAPSED]s 8 + [FIXED] src/lib.rs (1 fix)

Do you prefer something looks more like this?

.with_stderr_data( str![[r#" [COMPILING] foo v0.0.1 ([ROOT]/foo) [FIXED] build.rs (1 fix) [FIXED] src/lib.rs ([..]fix[..]) [FIXED] src/main.rs (1 fix) [FIXED] examples/foo.rs (1 fix) [FIXED] tests/a.rs (1 fix) [FINISHED] `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in [ELAPSED]s ... "#]]

Yes. Based on the comment, I think that matches the behavior of the old assertion and is still valid today.

weihanglo · 2024-07-02T00:06:34Z

tests/testsuite/fix.rs

    p.cargo("fix --edition --allow-no-vcs")
-        .with_stderr_contains("[CHECKING] foo [..]")
-        .with_stderr_contains(&format!(
-            "\
-[WARNING] `src/lib.rs` is already on the latest edition ({latest_stable}), unable to migrate further
-",
-            latest_stable = latest_stable
-        ))
+        .with_stderr_data(str![])
        .run();


No. I think we can add deprecated and leave off for now.

cargo/tests/testsuite/fix.rs

Lines 881 to 885 in c7cb45c

edition = '{}'

"#,

latest_stable

),

)

eth3lbert · 2024-07-02T00:44:50Z

Feedbacks addressed! Thanks for the review!

weihanglo · 2024-07-02T03:33:58Z

Thanks!

@bors r+

bors · 2024-07-02T03:34:01Z

📌 Commit ef27c27 has been approved by weihanglo

It is now in the queue for this repository.

test: mirgate fix* and future_incompat_report to snapbox ### What does this PR try to resolve? Part of #14039. Migrate following to snapbox: - `tests/testsuite/fix.rs` - `tests/testsuite/fix_n_times.rs` - `tests/testsuite/future_incompat_report.rs`

bors · 2024-07-02T03:35:08Z

⌛ Testing commit ef27c27 with merge 67bcb36...

bors · 2024-07-02T03:53:29Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

weihanglo · 2024-07-02T15:44:22Z

This is a new one.

---- doc::doc_workspace_open_binary_and_library stdout ----
running `D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\debug\cargo.exe doc --open`
thread 'doc::doc_workspace_open_binary_and_library' panicked at tests\testsuite\doc.rs:1608:10:

test failed running `D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\debug\cargo.exe doc --open`
error: process exited with code 101 (expected 0)
--- stdout

--- stderr
 Documenting foo v0.1.0 (D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\tmp\cit\t1308\foo\foo)
    Checking foo v0.1.0 (D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\tmp\cit\t1308\foo\foo)

thread 'main' has overflowed its stack
error: could not document `foo`

Caused by:
  process didn't exit successfully: `rustdoc --edition=2015 --crate-type lib --crate-name foolib foo\src\lib.rs -o D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\tmp\cit\t1308\foo\target\doc --check-cfg cfg(docsrs) --check-cfg "cfg(feature, values())" --error-format=json --json=diagnostic-rendered-ansi,artifacts,future-incompat -C metadata=4cabb6f925159d16 -L dependency=D:\a\cargo\cargo\target\tmp\cit\t1308\foo\target\debug\deps --crate-version 0.1.0` (exit code: 0xc00000fd, STATUS_STACK_OVERFLOW)

Let us retry

@bors retry

bors · 2024-07-02T16:20:51Z

⌛ Testing commit ef27c27 with merge bff8a08...

bors · 2024-07-02T16:53:12Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: weihanglo
Pushing bff8a08 to master...

Update cargo 23 commits in 4ed7bee47f7dd4416b36fada1909e9a62c546246..a515d463427b3912ec0365d106791f88c1c14e1b 2024-06-25 16:28:22 +0000 to 2024-07-02 20:53:36 +0000 - test: migrate rust_version and rustc* to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14177) - test: mirgate fix* and future_incompat_report to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14173) - test：migrate `edition/error` to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14175) - chore(deps): update compatible (rust-lang/cargo#14174) - refactor(source): Clean up after PathSource/RecursivePathSource split (rust-lang/cargo#14169) - test: Migrate some files to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14132) - test: fix several assertions (rust-lang/cargo#14167) - test: replace glob with explicit unordered calls (rust-lang/cargo#14166) - Make it clear that `CARGO_CFG_TARGET_FAMILY` is multi-valued (rust-lang/cargo#14165) - Document `CARGO_CFG_TARGET_ABI` (rust-lang/cargo#14164) - test: Migrate git to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14159) - test: migrate some files to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14158) - test: migrate registry and registry_auth to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14149) - gix: remove `revision` feature from cargo (rust-lang/cargo#14160) - test: migrate package* and publish* to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14130) - More `update --breaking` tests (rust-lang/cargo#14049) - test: migrate clean to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14096) - Allow `unexpected_builtin_cfgs` lint in `user_specific_cfgs` test (rust-lang/cargo#14153) - test: migrate search, source_replacement and standard_lib to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14151) - Docs: Update config summary to include missing keys. (rust-lang/cargo#14145) - test: migrate `dep_info/diagnostics/direct_minimal_versions` to snapbox (rust-lang/cargo#14143) - Docs: Remove duplicate `strip` section. (rust-lang/cargo#14146) - Docs: Fix curly quotes in config docs. (rust-lang/cargo#14144)

rustbot assigned weihanglo Jun 30, 2024

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jun 30, 2024

eth3lbert commented Jun 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

weihanglo mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2024

Port from bespoke assertions of snapbox #14039

Closed

weihanglo reviewed Jul 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

eth3lbert added 3 commits July 2, 2024 08:42

test: migrate fix to snapbox

882f347

test: migrate fix_n_times to snapbox

7dc940c

test: migrate future_incompat_report to snapbox

ef27c27

eth3lbert force-pushed the snapbox-f branch from 65702a7 to ef27c27 Compare July 2, 2024 00:43

weihanglo approved these changes Jul 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

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 Jul 2, 2024

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 Jul 2, 2024

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 Jul 2, 2024

bors merged commit bff8a08 into rust-lang:master Jul 2, 2024

eth3lbert deleted the snapbox-f branch July 2, 2024 20:31

weihanglo mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2024

Update cargo rust-lang/rust#127258

Merged

rustbot added this to the 1.81.0 milestone Jul 3, 2024

ehuss mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2025

Random stack overflow on windows-gnu rust-lang/rust#139070

Open

Conversation

eth3lbert commented Jun 30, 2024

What does this PR try to resolve?

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jun 30, 2024

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

eth3lbert Jun 30, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

eth3lbert commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

weihanglo commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

weihanglo commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 2, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

eth3lbert Jun 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading