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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix(embedded): Don't pollute script dir with lockfile #12284

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 19, 2023
Merged

fix(embedded): Don't pollute script dir with lockfile #12284

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 19, 2023

Commits on Jun 17, 2023

  1. test(embedded): Verify existing lockfile behavior

    @epage
    epage committed Jun 17, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    53a63b2 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history

  2. fix(embedded): Don't pollute script dir with lockfile 

    This puts the lockfile back into a target directory in the users home,
like before rust-lang#12268.

Another idea that came up was to move the workspace root to be in the
target directory (which would effectively be like pre-rust-lang#12268) but I
think that is a bit hacky / misleading.

This does mean that the lockfile is buried away from the user and they
can't pass it along with their script.  In most cases I've dealt with,
this would be fine.  When the lockfile is needed, they will also most
likely have a workspace, so it shoud have a local lockfile in that case.
The inbetween case is something that needs further evaluation for
whether we should handle it and how.
    @epage
    epage committed Jun 17, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    bb1f6f2 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history