Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remaining feedback from ILLink merge #79677
Remaining feedback from ILLink merge #79677
Changes from 1 commit
08f0f94
71bfb6b
b328d06
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
This file was deleted.
This file was deleted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's unfortunate that we don't have a good way to establish a live dependency here without bringing in the entire libs build graph. You clearly stated that when building the linker, you want to avoid to build the "clr+libs" subsets which is why you chose to build against an LKG instead. But by using an LKG, we now bring in these OOB prebuilts that we can either add to dependency flow or just keep pinned to a static version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @ericstj
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we refactor these tests to be part of the libs test subset, or some test subset that does depend on both libs and linker?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, we can always sequence them very late or make them depend on the entire libs subset to be built but that's not what the linker team wants. They prefer the least number of pre-steps to build and test the linker, and depending on an LKG seems like the right compromise here.
Another thought, we could make sure that these tests depend on the
NetCoreAppPrevious
asset of these OOB libraries instead ofNetCoreAppCurrent
which would be achievable via a ProjectReference and aSetTargetFramework=$(NetCoreAppPrevious)
metadata on it. Obviously, that would only work for projects that don't contribute to source build (i.e. tests).