refactor: housekeeping for 1.70.0 #12217
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @ehuss (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
A-cli
* Some usages still wait for `LazyCell`. * `TEST_ROOTS` is no longer used. Removed.
weihanglo
commented
Jun 1, 2023
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2023
Update cargo 14 commits in f7b95e31642e09c2b6eabb18ed75007dda6677a0..b0fa79679e717cd077b7fc0fa4166f47107f1ba9 2023-05-30 19:25:02 +0000 to 2023-06-03 14:19:48 +0000 - Emit error when users try to use a toolchain via the `add` or `install` command (rust-lang/cargo#12226) - Support "default" option for `build.jobs` (rust-lang/cargo#12222) - Fix typo in changelog (rust-lang/cargo#12227) - chore: Sort `-Z` flags match statement (rust-lang/cargo#12223) - Update curl-sys (rust-lang/cargo#12218) - Bump to 0.73.0; update changelog (rust-lang/cargo#12219) - refactor: housekeeping for 1.70.0 (rust-lang/cargo#12217) - nit: fix typo in changelog for 1.70 (rust-lang/cargo#12215) - Remove a noop `.clone` (rust-lang/cargo#12213) - refactor: compiler invocations (rust-lang/cargo#12211) - cargo clean: use `remove_dir_all` (rust-lang/cargo#11442) - Add a small note about indexes ignoring SemVer build metadata. (rust-lang/cargo#12206) - Revert "chore: detect the channel a PR wants to merge into" (rust-lang/cargo#12204) - Don't distinguish `Debuginfo::None` and `Debuginfo::Explicit(None)` (rust-lang/cargo#12205) r? `@ghost`
RalfJung
pushed a commit
to RalfJung/miri
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 11, 2023
Update cargo 14 commits in f7b95e31642e09c2b6eabb18ed75007dda6677a0..b0fa79679e717cd077b7fc0fa4166f47107f1ba9 2023-05-30 19:25:02 +0000 to 2023-06-03 14:19:48 +0000 - Emit error when users try to use a toolchain via the `add` or `install` command (rust-lang/cargo#12226) - Support "default" option for `build.jobs` (rust-lang/cargo#12222) - Fix typo in changelog (rust-lang/cargo#12227) - chore: Sort `-Z` flags match statement (rust-lang/cargo#12223) - Update curl-sys (rust-lang/cargo#12218) - Bump to 0.73.0; update changelog (rust-lang/cargo#12219) - refactor: housekeeping for 1.70.0 (rust-lang/cargo#12217) - nit: fix typo in changelog for 1.70 (rust-lang/cargo#12215) - Remove a noop `.clone` (rust-lang/cargo#12213) - refactor: compiler invocations (rust-lang/cargo#12211) - cargo clean: use `remove_dir_all` (rust-lang/cargo#11442) - Add a small note about indexes ignoring SemVer build metadata. (rust-lang/cargo#12206) - Revert "chore: detect the channel a PR wants to merge into" (rust-lang/cargo#12204) - Don't distinguish `Debuginfo::None` and `Debuginfo::Explicit(None)` (rust-lang/cargo#12205) r? `@ghost`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What does this PR try to resolve?
Some housekeeping for 1.70.0.
How should we test and review this PR?
Eyeball review is sufficient I guess?
I didn't benchmark the new
OnceLockimplementation, should I?Additional information
We are still waiting for
LazyCellto replace bothlazy_staticandlazycell.