Skip to content
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

[beta] Update cargo (CVE fixes included) #101922

Closed
wants to merge 29 commits into from

Conversation

weihanglo
Copy link
Member

3 commits in 4bcb3c65e440a12044092b85ffea8fac6cb96f42..387270bc7f446d17869c7f208207c73231d6a252 2022-08-17 21:01:34 +0000 to 2022-09-16 20:18:27 +0000

Mark-Simulacrum and others added 29 commits August 8, 2022 08:32
…mulacrum

[beta] 1.64.0 branching

Includes cherry picks of:

* rust-lang#100207
* rust-lang/rust-clippy#9302
* rust-lang/rust@49b1904 (explicit_auto_deref into nursery)
*  Avoid ICE in rustdoc when using Fn bounds rust-lang#100205

r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
…mulacrum

Rollup of beta backports

This rolls up bumping stage0 to released stable and:

* Iterate generics_def_id_map in reverse order to fix P-critical issue rust-lang#100340
*  [BETA 1.64] Only override published resolver when the workspace is different rust-lang/cargo#10970

r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
This reverts commit 3266460.

It was discovered that they are not implemented correctly, which
does not make them ready for stabilization.
…compiler-errors

Revert let_chains stabilization

This reverts commit 3266460.

It was discovered in rust-lang#100513 that they are not implemented correctly, which does not make them ready for stabilization.

The merge in the let parsing had a few conflicts, cc `@compiler-errors` and `@c410-f3r` to make sure I did it correctly (alternatively I could also revert `@compiler-errors'` let diagnostic improvement PR as well if a simpler revert is desired).

r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Delay formatting trimmed path until lint/error is emitted

Fixes rust-lang#99387

r? `@davidtwco`
…ckh726

Use `node_type_opt` to skip over generics that were not expected

Fixes rust-lang#100154
Revert "Rollup merge of rust-lang#97346 - JohnTitor:remove-back-compat-hacks, …

…r=oli-obk"

This reverts commit c703d11, reversing
changes made to 64eb9ab.

it didn't apply cleanly, so now it works the same for RPIT and for TAIT instead of just working for RPIT, but we should keep those in sync anyway. It also exposed a TAIT bug (see the feature gated test that now ICEs).

r? `@pnkfelix`

fixes rust-lang#99536
[BETA] Beta 1.64 backports

* Cargo:
    * remove missed reference to workspace inheritance in unstable.md (rust-lang/cargo#11002)
* Delay formatting trimmed path until lint/error is emitted rust-lang#99893
* Use `node_type_opt` to skip over generics that were not expected rust-lang#100155
* Revert "Remove a back-compat hack on lazy TAIT rust-lang#97346" rust-lang#99860
…r-beta-1.64, r=compiler-errors

revert mir inlining policy for beta-1.64

revert mir inlining policy for beta-1.64

Fix rust-lang#101004
…=pnkfelix

beta-backport of provenance-related CTFE changes

This is all part of dealing with rust-lang#99923.

The first commit backports the effects of rust-lang#101101. `@pnkfelix` asked for this and it turned out to be easy, so I think this is uncontroversial.

The second commit effectively repeats rust-lang#99965, which un-does the effects of rust-lang#97684 and therefore means rust-lang#99923 does not apply to the beta branch. I honestly don't think we should do this; the sentiment in rust-lang#99923 was that we should go ahead with the change but improve diagnostics. But `@pnkfelix` seemed to request such a change so I figured I would offer the option.

I'll be on vacation soon, so if you all decide to take the first commit only, then someone please just force-push to this branch and remove the 2nd commit.
3 commits in 4bcb3c65e440a12044092b85ffea8fac6cb96f42..387270bc7f446d17869c7f208207c73231d6a252
2022-08-17 21:01:34 +0000 to 2022-09-16 20:18:27 +0000

- Beta backport rust-lang/cargo#11082 (rust-lang/cargo#11097)
- [Beta] Run `reach_max_unpack_size` test only on debug build (rust-lang/cargo#11090)
- [beta] Fix for CVE-2022-36113 and CVE-2022-36114 (rust-lang/cargo#11088)
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Sep 16, 2022

Some changes occurred in src/tools/cargo

cc @ehuss

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @joshtriplett

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

  • Pull requests are usually filed against the master branch for this repo, but this one is against beta. Please double check that you specified the right target!
  • These commits modify submodules.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 16, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 19, 2022

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #101857) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

Will include this into the stable PR.

@weihanglo weihanglo deleted the update-beta-cargo branch September 19, 2022 12:58
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2022
[stable] Prepare 1.64.0 release

This PR prepares the 1.64.0 stable release builds.

In addition to bumping the channel and including the latest release notes changes, this PR also backports the following PRs:

*  rust-lang#100852
*  rust-lang#101366
*  rust-lang#101468
*  rust-lang#101922

This PR also reverts the following PRs, as decided in rust-lang#101899 (comment):

* rust-lang#95295
* rust-lang#99136 (followup to the previous PR)

r? `@ghost`
cc `@rust-lang/release`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.