Adds libgit2 1.9.1

[OlekRaymond]

No description provided.

[bazel-io]

Hello @jmillikin, modules you maintain (libgit2) have been updated in this PR.
Please review the changes. You can view a diff against the previous version in the "Generate module diff" check.

[OlekRaymond]

@bazel-io skip_check unstable_url

[jmillikin]

Looks like the module diff workflow is broken. Diffed manually:

--- modules/libgit2/1.9.0/MODULE.bazel
+++ modules/libgit2/1.9.1/MODULE.bazel
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 module(
     name = "libgit2",
-    version = "1.9.0",
+    version = "1.9.1",
+    bazel_compatibility = [">=7.2.1"],
     compatibility_level = 1,
 )
 
--- modules/libgit2/1.9.0/overlay/MODULE.bazel
+++ modules/libgit2/1.9.1/overlay/MODULE.bazel
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 module(
     name = "libgit2",
-    version = "1.9.0",
+    version = "1.9.1",
+    bazel_compatibility = [">=7.2.1"],
     compatibility_level = 1,
 )
 
--- modules/libgit2/1.9.0/overlay/src/libgit2/BUILD.bazel
+++ modules/libgit2/1.9.1/overlay/src/libgit2/BUILD.bazel
@@ -23,6 +23,12 @@
         "//deps/xdiff",
         "//src/util",
     ],
+    conlyopts =  select({
+        "@platforms//os:windows": [],
+        "//conditions:default": [
+            "-Wno-error",
+        ],
+    }),
     visibility = ["//:__subpackages__"],
     deps = ["//include:git2"],
 )
--- modules/libgit2/1.9.0/source.json
+++ modules/libgit2/1.9.1/source.json
@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@
 {
-    "url": "https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2/archive/refs/tags/v1.9.0.tar.gz",
-    "integrity": "sha256-dbJ9TW30S9NOL3BmPP2Zj17EHmgOHlkyOLvlF6hMftI=",
-    "strip_prefix": "libgit2-1.9.0",
+    "url": "https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2/archive/refs/tags/v1.9.1.tar.gz",
+    "integrity": "sha256-FMqzAUsretdZcP9FSOg2FfdNcZr+AKpHm0qInB4T/AA=",
+    "strip_prefix": "libgit2-1.9.1",
     "patch_strip": 0,
     "overlay": {
         "BUILD.bazel": "sha256-fdg9xWPYD2n+6KA/6CpD3jduFkZ7tl9rMeh83e+Q+Ak=",
-        "MODULE.bazel": "sha256-bgosvWu5uZ6G/cvrLfekRAP1fsBwofplohQ+FWltM4k=",
+        "MODULE.bazel": "sha256-xKjJdIvY/DT5Zhaz+NPbHPeG4v0iX/VvdiuLRwuMhes=",
         "deps/llhttp/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-XLmlczQX4YDVuIz+pon+dosGRRlO08VAL/Zm4dvmrM8=",
         "deps/pcre/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-LE92UDy/qqpzR/AL3YAJ5vIghMm+h4Mhgw8t4ryqByA=",
         "deps/xdiff/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-kWOJfhwdeEIbw3SQ1mt+DUvidUfhxVO6nREpiZ5LWHM=",
         "include/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-Rpi8QCJUzSiLYz7GoIo4aY7fCpQgYJ5I8mdWZLiQV8Y=",
-        "src/libgit2/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-SWBJrkgMOcemxh0mTZLX/D0xeN8rdgc+Jn3YPIArJpw=",
+        "src/libgit2/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-BpsrseiJWPYlaXStaOZE9ku3dF0/Vy6dcpWGGx5CZwI=",
         "src/util/BUILD.bazel": "sha256-Z6xhcmlpSh9aJUBzEISmP42Om3UvvArpZbi2T1EGaMg="
     }
 }

[jmillikin]

What's this for? Left-over build debugging...?

[OlekRaymond]

gcc and clang compile with warnings 1 2 and has some macros intended for user use which also produce warnings (see 1: GIT_REPOSITORY_INIT_OPTIONS_INIT) so compiling with --copts = ["-Werror"] breaks the build.

I based it on this precedence though happy to remove/change.

Thanks

[jmillikin]

Could you revert this addition?

The @platforms//os:* conditions are for changing flags according to the target OS. If you want to set flags for specific compilers, use @bazel_tools//tools/cpp:compiler instead (see https://github.com/jmillikin/rules_bison/blob/v0.4/bison/rules/bison_repository.bzl#L56-L85 for an example).

The example you copied from is probably assuming that Windows builds always use MSVC and that non-Windows always uses either GCC or Clang, which is true for BCR CI but not generally true for actual users. For example lots of folks use Clang on Windows.

Also, looking at the links you posted, the warnings in question do seem to be legitimate -- they're warning about stuff like uninitialized variables.

If you're building your own code with -Werror that's fine, but I wouldn't recommend setting it with --copts because that'll apply it to every cc_library in your dependency tree. Many open-source projects have a ... relaxed ... approach to fixing compiler warnings, and there's always the possibility that a newer compiler will emit warnings for older code.