Bump rustfix 0.8.1 -> 0.8.7 #146605

jyn514 · 2025-09-15T17:47:57Z

This commit can be replicated by running cargo update -p rustfix --precise 0.8.7 && x test ui --bless.

The reasons this affects UI tests is as follows:

The UI test suite runs rustc with -Z deduplicate-diagnostics=no --error-format=json, which means that rustc emits multiple errors containing identical suggestions. That caused the weird-looking code that had multiple X: Copy suggestions.
Those suggestions are interpreted not by rustc itself, but by the rustfix library, maintained by cargo but published as a separate crates.io library and used by compiletest.
Sometime between rustfix 0.8.1 and 0.8.7 (probably in Add transactional semantics to rustfix cargo#14747, but it's hard to tell because rustfix's versioning doesn't match cargo's), rustfix got smarter and stopped applying duplicate suggestions.

Update rustfix to match cargo's behavior. Ideally, we would always share a version of rustfix between cargo and rustc (perhaps with a path dependency?), to make sure we are testing the behavior we ship. But for now, just manually update it to match.

Note that the latest version of rustfix published to crates.io is 0.9.1, not 0.8.7. But 0.9.1 is not the version used in cargo, which is 0.9.3. Rather than trying to match versions exactly, I just updated rustfix to the latest in the 0.8 branch.

rustbot · 2025-09-15T17:48:00Z

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

rustbot · 2025-09-15T17:48:02Z

r? @nnethercote

rustbot has assigned @nnethercote.
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

This commit can be replicated by running `cargo update -p rustfix --precise 0.8.7 && x test ui --bless`. --- The reasons this affects UI tests is as follows: - The UI test suite runs rustc with `-Z deduplicate-diagnostics=no --error-format=json`, which means that rustc emits multiple errors containing identical suggestions. That caused the weird-looking code that had multiple `X: Copy` suggestions. - Those suggestions are interpreted not by rustc itself, but by the `rustfix` library, maintained by cargo but published as a separate crates.io library and used by compiletest. - Sometime between rustfix 0.8.1 and 0.8.7 (probably in cargo 14747, but it's hard to tell because rustfix's versioning doesn't match cargo's), rustfix got smarter and stopped applying duplicate suggestions. Update rustfix to match cargo's behavior. Ideally, we would always share a version of rustfix between cargo and rustc (perhaps with a path dependency?), to make sure we are testing the behavior we ship. But for now, just manually update it to match. Note that the latest version of rustfix published to crates.io is 0.9.1, not 0.8.7. But 0.9.1 is not the version used in cargo, which is 0.9.3. Rather than trying to match versions exactly, I just updated rustfix to the latest in the 0.8 branch.

nnethercote · 2025-09-15T23:24:00Z

tests/ui/suggestions/missing-bound-in-derive-copy-impl-3.fixed


 #[derive(Debug, Copy, Clone)] //~ ERROR the trait `Copy` cannot be implemented for this type
-pub struct AABB<K: Copy + Debug + std::fmt::Debug + std::fmt::Debug + std::fmt::Debug>{
+pub struct AABB<K: Copy + Debug + std::fmt::Debug>{


I'll give you a gold star if you also add the missing space before the {!

nnethercote

The de-duplication is nice.

View changes since this review

nnethercote · 2025-09-15T23:31:16Z

Note that the latest version of rustfix published to crates.io is 0.9.1, not 0.8.7. But 0.9.1 is not the version used in cargo, which is 0.9.3. Rather than trying to match versions exactly, I just updated rustfix to the latest in the 0.8 branch.

Hmm.

How does cargo use 0.9.3 if that version isn't on crates.io? (Oh, I see, rustfix is a crate within cargo.)
I can understand how cargo might be using a version of rustfix that is one version ahead of what's on crates.io. But two versions? Why isn't 0.9.2 on crates.io? (Pre-existing problem, mostly orthogonal to this PR.)
Is it worth updating to 0.9.1 in this PR? Good to get on 0.9 to get closer to Cargo's version, even if it doesn't match exactly?

r=me for the PR as is, because it's a clear improvement, but I'll be happy if you fix the whitespace issue I mentioned above and also got onto 0.9.1 (assuming it doesn't cause extra complications).

@bors delegate=nnethercote

bors · 2025-09-15T23:31:19Z

✌️ @nnethercote, you can now approve this pull request!

If @nnethercote told you to "r=me" after making some further change, please make that change, then do @bors r=@nnethercote

jyn514 · 2025-09-16T13:00:26Z

I'm going to merge this as-is just to minimize conflicts for @clubby789 in #145849, then bump to 0.9.1 in a separate PR.

@bors r=nnethercote

I'll give you a gold star if you also add the missing space before the {!

I don't have time to commit to this right now. I also kinda feel that this should be rustfmt's job, not rustc's, doing it in this case doesn't seem too bad but getting it right in the general case seems quite hard and I'm not sure it makes sense to spend too much time on it.

bors · 2025-09-16T13:00:29Z

@jyn514: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

jyn514 · 2025-09-16T13:00:49Z

@bors r=@nnethercote

bors · 2025-09-16T13:00:52Z

@jyn514: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

jyn514 · 2025-09-16T13:01:25Z

oh, i think you needed to say delegate=jyn514 for it to work.

samueltardieu · 2025-09-16T14:33:22Z

@bors r=nnethercote

bors · 2025-09-16T14:33:27Z

📌 Commit 2adaa5d has been approved by nnethercote

It is now in the queue for this repository.

ehuss · 2025-09-16T16:20:52Z

cc @weihanglo just FYI.

I don't really understand why the weekly updates weren't updating rustfix. We were depending on that to avoid them getting too out of sync. Was it possibly due to a pinned dependency?

jyn514 · 2025-09-16T16:28:55Z

I don't really understand why the #145189 weren't updating rustfix. We were depending on that to avoid them getting too out of sync. Was it possibly due to a pinned dependency?

Yes, tracing was pinned to an old version, and was just unpinned: #146188

Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #146442 (Display ?Sized, const, and lifetime parameters in trait item suggestions across a crate boundary) - #146474 (Improve `core::ascii` coverage) - #146605 (Bump rustfix 0.8.1 -> 0.8.7) - #146611 (bootstrap: emit hint if a config key is used in the wrong section) - #146618 (Do not run ui test if options specific to LLVM are used when another codegen backend is used) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

nnethercote · 2025-09-16T22:27:23Z

Apologies for messing up the delegate syntax.

I'll give you a gold star if you also add the missing space before the {!

I don't have time to commit to this right now. I also kinda feel that this should be rustfmt's job, not rustc's, doing it in this case doesn't seem too bad but getting it right in the general case seems quite hard and I'm not sure it makes sense to spend too much time on it.

The problem is simply that tests/ui/suggestions/missing-bound-in-derive-copy-impl-3.rs is misformatted, and we don't run rustfmt on tests. So it would be a single character change. But it's not important and the other improvements in this PR are good and I see you want it merged quickly for #145849, so I will give you a gold stat anyway: ⭐

Rollup merge of #146605 - jyn514:update-rustfix, r=nnethercote Bump rustfix 0.8.1 -> 0.8.7 This commit can be replicated by running `cargo update -p rustfix --precise 0.8.7 && x test ui --bless`. --- The reasons this affects UI tests is as follows: - The UI test suite runs rustc with `-Z deduplicate-diagnostics=no --error-format=json`, which means that rustc emits multiple errors containing identical suggestions. That caused the weird-looking code that had multiple `X: Copy` suggestions. - Those suggestions are interpreted not by rustc itself, but by the `rustfix` library, maintained by cargo but published as a separate crates.io library and used by compiletest. - Sometime between rustfix 0.8.1 and 0.8.7 (probably in rust-lang/cargo#14747, but it's hard to tell because rustfix's versioning doesn't match cargo's), rustfix got smarter and stopped applying duplicate suggestions. Update rustfix to match cargo's behavior. Ideally, we would always share a version of rustfix between cargo and rustc (perhaps with a path dependency?), to make sure we are testing the behavior we ship. But for now, just manually update it to match. Note that the latest version of rustfix published to crates.io is 0.9.1, not 0.8.7. But 0.9.1 is not the version used in cargo, which is 0.9.3. Rather than trying to match versions exactly, I just updated rustfix to the latest in the 0.8 branch.

jyn514 · 2025-09-24T14:44:04Z

Is it worth updating to 0.9.1 in this PR? Good to get on 0.9 to get closer to Cargo's version, even if it doesn't match exactly?

FYI, I looked into this, and it's not trivial because clippy also depends on rustfix. So it involves:

bumping rustfix in ui-test
bumping ui-test in clippy
bumping rustfix in compiletest

in that order.

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 15, 2025

rustbot assigned nnethercote Sep 15, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

jyn514 force-pushed the update-rustfix branch from dd1545f to 2adaa5d Compare September 15, 2025 17:48

klensy mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2025

Weekly cargo update + update allowed dependencies list #145849

Open

nnethercote reviewed Sep 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

nnethercote approved these changes Sep 15, 2025

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 Sep 16, 2025

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2025

Rollup of 5 pull requests #146650

Merged

bors merged commit b1a7246 into rust-lang:master Sep 17, 2025
10 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.92.0 milestone Sep 17, 2025

jyn514 deleted the update-rustfix branch September 24, 2025 14:40

Bump rustfix 0.8.1 -> 0.8.7 #146605

Bump rustfix 0.8.1 -> 0.8.7 #146605

Uh oh!

Conversation

jyn514 commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

nnethercote Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nnethercote left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

jyn514 commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

jyn514 commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

jyn514 commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

samueltardieu commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

ehuss commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

jyn514 commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

nnethercote commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jyn514 commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nnethercote left a comment •

edited by rustbot

Loading