-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 805
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
[Merged by Bors] - Use lockfile with cross and fix audit fail #4656
Conversation
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.
Good catch! 😱 🎉
Given the |
bors r+ |
## Issue Addressed Temporary ignore for #4651. We are unaffected, and upstream will be patched in a few days. ## Proposed Changes - Ignore cargo audit failures (ublocks CI) - Use `--locked` when building with `cross`. We use `--locked` for regular builds, and I think excluding it from `cross` was just an oversight. I think for consistent builds it makes sense to use `--locked` while building. This is particularly relevant for release binaries, which otherwise will just use a random selection of dependencies that exist on build day (near impossible to recreate if we had to).
Build failed (retrying...): |
bors r- |
Canceled. |
## Issue Addressed Temporary ignore for #4651. We are unaffected, and upstream will be patched in a few days. ## Proposed Changes - Ignore cargo audit failures (ublocks CI) - Use `--locked` when building with `cross`. We use `--locked` for regular builds, and I think excluding it from `cross` was just an oversight. I think for consistent builds it makes sense to use `--locked` while building. This is particularly relevant for release binaries, which otherwise will just use a random selection of dependencies that exist on build day (near impossible to recreate if we had to).
Pull request successfully merged into unstable. Build succeeded! The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon. If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here. If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page.
|
## Issue Addressed Temporary ignore for sigp#4651. We are unaffected, and upstream will be patched in a few days. ## Proposed Changes - Ignore cargo audit failures (ublocks CI) - Use `--locked` when building with `cross`. We use `--locked` for regular builds, and I think excluding it from `cross` was just an oversight. I think for consistent builds it makes sense to use `--locked` while building. This is particularly relevant for release binaries, which otherwise will just use a random selection of dependencies that exist on build day (near impossible to recreate if we had to).
## Issue Addressed Temporary ignore for sigp#4651. We are unaffected, and upstream will be patched in a few days. ## Proposed Changes - Ignore cargo audit failures (ublocks CI) - Use `--locked` when building with `cross`. We use `--locked` for regular builds, and I think excluding it from `cross` was just an oversight. I think for consistent builds it makes sense to use `--locked` while building. This is particularly relevant for release binaries, which otherwise will just use a random selection of dependencies that exist on build day (near impossible to recreate if we had to).
Issue Addressed
Temporary ignore for #4651. We are unaffected, and upstream will be patched in a few days.
Proposed Changes
--locked
when building withcross
. We use--locked
for regular builds, and I think excluding it fromcross
was just an oversight.I think for consistent builds it makes sense to use
--locked
while building. This is particularly relevant for release binaries, which otherwise will just use a random selection of dependencies that exist on build day (near impossible to recreate if we had to).