Use explicit version of cfg-if in msrv build #362

2019-11-09T06:11:37-06:00

KodrAus commented

2019-11-09 06:11:37 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Just to try fix up our CI.

KodrAus commented

2019-11-09 21:13:53 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

r? @sfackler

sfackler commented

2019-11-19 18:50:17 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

It wasn't worth pinning cfg-if?

KodrAus commented

2019-11-23 17:40:23 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I didn't have a lot of success pinning cfg-if using the cargo update onn the 1.16 toolchain, but I didn't actually try setting a = bound in our own Cargo.toml. We didn't get a lot of mileage out of bumping our MSRV from 1.16 to 1.31 anyways, so I'll give that a go 👍

I didn't have a lot of success pinning `cfg-if` using the `cargo update` onn the `1.16` toolchain, but I didn't actually try setting a `=` bound in our own `Cargo.toml`. We didn't get a lot of mileage out of bumping our MSRV from `1.16` to `1.31` anyways, so I'll give that a go :+1:

KodrAus commented

2019-11-23 17:54:25 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Ok, looks like that works out just fine!

sfackler (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2019-11-23 18:04:33 -06:00

Cargo.toml

This will cause issues if log is used in a dependency graph with another crate with a non = dependency on cfg-if. Cargo will iirc just refuse to resolve versions. If we can't just cargo update -p cfg-if --precise 0.1.9 in the MSRV build, it may just be best to bump our MSRV to whatever cfg-if uses.

This will cause issues if log is used in a dependency graph with another crate with a non `=` dependency on cfg-if. Cargo will iirc just refuse to resolve versions. If we can't just `cargo update -p cfg-if --precise 0.1.9` in the MSRV build, it may just be best to bump our MSRV to whatever cfg-if uses.

KodrAus (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2019-11-23 18:12:07 -06:00

Cargo.toml

Ah right. I’d assumed we’d possibly just end up compiling two versions of cfg-if.

I’ll look again at why the cargo update path didn’t work out for me and fall back to bumping back to 1.31.

Ah right. I’d assumed we’d possibly just end up compiling two versions of `cfg-if`. I’ll look again at why the `cargo update` path didn’t work out for me and fall back to bumping back to `1.31`.

sfackler commented

2019-11-24 06:57:44 -06:00

(Migrated from github.com)

rustfmt's failing, but r=me otherwise. Realistically, no-one's going to do the downgrade dance with cfg-if anyway...

sfackler (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2019-11-24 13:05:24 -06:00

src/lib.rs

					
				@ -911,28 +911,17 @@ impl<'a> RecordBuilder<'a> {

				    /// [`Metadata::builder().build()`]: struct.MetadataBuilder.html#method.build

},

```suggestion }, ```

Sign in to join this conversation.

No reviewers

No labels

No milestone

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference

gh-rust-lang/log!362

				`@ -911,28 +911,17 @@ impl<'a> RecordBuilder<'a> {`
				/// [`Metadata::builder().build()`]: struct.MetadataBuilder.html#method.build

Rows
Columns