-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
feat: Added warning when failing to update index cache #15014
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
r? @weihanglo rustbot has assigned @weihanglo. Use |
@@ -226,14 +227,21 @@ pub struct CacheManager<'gctx> { | |||
cache_root: Filesystem, | |||
/// [`GlobalContext`] reference for convenience. | |||
gctx: &'gctx GlobalContext, | |||
/// Keeps track of if we have sent a warning message if there was an error updating the cache. | |||
/// The motivation is to avoid warning spam if the cache is not writable. | |||
has_warned: Mutex<bool>, |
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.
AtomicBool
should be good enough here. But maybe bool
is sufficient and we don't even need to coordinate threads here because most parts of Cargo are single-threaded.
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.
We have a similar test, maybe we can take reuse that test to assert their stderr?
cargo/tests/testsuite/registry.rs
Lines 3053 to 3098 in 2939e96
fn readonly_registry_still_works() { | |
Package::new("foo", "0.1.0").publish(); | |
let p = project() | |
.file( | |
"Cargo.toml", | |
r#" | |
[package] | |
name = "a" | |
version = "0.5.0" | |
edition = "2015" | |
authors = [] | |
[dependencies] | |
foo = '0.1.0' | |
"#, | |
) | |
.file("src/lib.rs", "") | |
.build(); | |
p.cargo("generate-lockfile").run(); | |
p.cargo("fetch --locked").run(); | |
chmod_readonly(&paths::home(), true); | |
p.cargo("check").run(); | |
// make sure we un-readonly the files afterwards so "cargo clean" can remove them (#6934) | |
chmod_readonly(&paths::home(), false); | |
fn chmod_readonly(path: &Path, readonly: bool) { | |
for entry in t!(path.read_dir()) { | |
let entry = t!(entry); | |
let path = entry.path(); | |
if t!(entry.file_type()).is_dir() { | |
chmod_readonly(&path, readonly); | |
} else { | |
set_readonly(&path, readonly); | |
} | |
} | |
set_readonly(path, readonly); | |
} | |
fn set_readonly(path: &Path, readonly: bool) { | |
let mut perms = t!(path.metadata()).permissions(); | |
perms.set_readonly(readonly); | |
t!(fs::set_permissions(path, perms)); | |
} | |
} |
What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes #13712
Adds a warning if there is an error updating the index cache.
It also attempts to avoid warning spam as requested in this comment
Below is an example output
How should we test and review this PR?
I tested this on my machine by manually changing the owner/permission of the index files
I wasn't quiet sure about the best way to add a test to the testsuite for this. 😅
If there is good way to create a test for this lmk