feat(package): add --exclude-lockfile flag #15234
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
A-cli
|
Mind cleaning up the commit history (reorder test first, squash test update), including updating commint message for new flag name? |
After dd698ff, `cargo package --no-verify` at least fails in three different cases: * An unpublished package depending on itself as a dev-dependency (cyclic self-referential dev-dependencies). * Can be resolved by removing the `version` field from the affected dev-dependency. * `-Zpackage-workspace` doesn't help with it. * Existing `cargo package` has `--package <pkg>` specifying certain unpublished packages. * Can be resolved by specifying all unpublished packages in one `cargo` call. * `-Zpackage-workspace` also requires all dependency versions available in the target registry when calling, so doesn't help. * `cargo package --no-verify` has been used as a kind of “plumbing commands” to create tarballs without considering dependency orders. The use cases include: * Preparing tarballs for other package managers. * Integrating into custom develop workflows for unpublished/internal crates. * Constructing custom/private registries. This commit shows the former two cases.
When `--exclude-lockfile` is enabled, `cargo package` will not verify the lock file if present, nor will it generate a new one if absent. Cargo.lock will not be included in the resulting tarball. Together with `--no-verify`, this flag decouples packaging from checking the registry index. While this is useful for some non-normal workflows that requires to assemble packages having unpublished dependencies. It is recommended to use `-Zpackage-workspace` to package the entire workspace, instead of opting out lockfile.
Was in a haste leaving the office. Sorry. |
weihanglo
commented
Feb 26, 2025
| {{#option "`--exclude-lockfile`" }} | ||
| Don't include the lock file when packaging. | ||
|
|
||
| This flag is not for general use. Always consider packaging with a lockfile. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if we really want to mention this. People using cargo package usually are already in an unusual workflow.
|
Thanks for stealing, very much appreciated! (Especially the part where I don't have to come up with a better name for the flag ;-)) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes #15059
Fixes #15159
This provides an escape hatch
--exclude-lockfilefor uncommon workflowsthat don't verify (
--no-verifyis passed) the build with their unpublished packagesWhen
--exclude-lockfileis enabled,cargo packagewill not verify the lock file if present,nor will it generate a new one if absent.
Cargo.lock will not be included in the resulting tarball.
Together with
--no-verify,this flag decouples packaging from checking the registry index.
While this is useful for some non-normal workflows that requires
to assemble packages having unpublished dependencies.
It is recommended to use
-Zpackage-workspaceto package the entireworkspace, instead of opting out lockfile.
How should we test and review this PR?
The first commit was stolen from NoisyCoil@1a104b5 (credit to @NoisyCoil!)
The second added two failing cases we observed in #15059.
Additional information