Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 #6465

Forgind · 2021-05-19T23:02:26Z

Summary

Solution metaprojects should have a target for each project they contain, so that you can build a single project or set of projects in the context of the solution. A regression in 16.10 means that instead, specifying a project name as a target when building a solution attempts to build a target with that name for every project in the solution.

Customer impact

Customers cannot build a subset of a solution by specifying a project between #6282 and this PR.

Regression?

Yes, from 16.9. This bug was introduced in #6282. The critical line is line 786 of SolutionProjectGenerator, though all similar instances were reverted in this case. Note that as #6282 is an agglomeration of functionally unrelated changes, no other files in #6282 relied on the changes in SolutionProjectGenerator.

Changes Made

Reverted the part of #6282 using Except incorrectly, i.e., the part in SolutionProjectGenerator, and added a test.

Testing

Created a unit test that fails before the other changes in this PR and succeeds afterwards. The unit test mimics but simplifies the customer's repro.

Risk

Low. Revert to prior implementation.

KirillOsenkov · 2021-05-19T23:24:46Z

src/Build/Construction/Solution/SolutionProjectGenerator.cs

@@ -782,7 +782,7 @@ private void EvaluateAndAddProjects(List<ProjectInSolution> projectsInOrder, Lis
                AddTraversalTargetForProject(traversalInstance, project, projectConfiguration, "Publish", null, canBuildDirectly);

                // Add any other targets specified by the user that were not already added
-                foreach (string targetName in _targetNames.Except(traversalInstance.Targets.Keys, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
+                foreach (string targetName in _targetNames.Where(i => !traversalInstance.Targets.ContainsKey(i)))


Should we extract method that returns the enumerable? And use it in four places? And add a detailed comment explaining that it has to be lazy because evidently the traversalInstance.Targets contents changes during enumeration? It's a tricky spot.

also need to pay attention to how Keys behaves - is it returning the live collection or a snapshot of the keys?

Extract method might be dicey - maybe better keep as is for simplicity... just add comments? You decide

I want this to be as small of a change and as safe of a change as possible, since this is going into 16.10 rather than 17.0. This is a straight revert of the relevant part of the commit that caused the issue, which is safest in my opinion. Adding a comment is a good plan, though—I'll just add it for the first case, since that's the only one that I know should be just in time.

Agreed on keeping this to a revert. Can extract as follow up in a future milestone if that's better.

Yes, let’s not extract, it was just a knee jerk reaction of seeing the changes in four places. All good!

Exclude takes a snapshot of what we're excluding. We change the Enumerable mid-enumeration, which makes that invalid.

This allows to build Node.js at the (temporary) cost of longer build times. Refs: nodejs#38872 Refs: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/releases/tag/v16.10.0 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6465 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6373

elikrief · 2021-05-31T20:07:51Z

it seems that using the "rebuild" switch is working as a workaround

msbuild solution.sln -t project:rebuild

This allows to build Node.js at the (temporary) cost of longer build times. Refs: nodejs#38872 Refs: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/releases/tag/v16.10.0 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6465 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6373 PR-URL: nodejs#38873 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>

This allows to build Node.js at the (temporary) cost of longer build times. Refs: #38872 Refs: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/releases/tag/v16.10.0 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6465 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6373 PR-URL: #38873 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>

ben-may · 2021-06-02T20:04:23Z

Will this be released in 16.10.1? We have tests and things that are hitting this bug.
Thanks!

rainersigwald · 2021-06-02T20:06:16Z

@ben-may Yes, it's in the internal builds and will be in the public 16.10.1.

ben-may · 2021-06-02T22:36:43Z

Thanks!

This allows to build Node.js at the (temporary) cost of longer build times. Refs: #38872 Refs: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/releases/tag/v16.10.0 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6465 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6373 PR-URL: #38873 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>

john-hynes · 2021-06-08T03:51:03Z

We've hit this issue with Pipeline builds in Azure DevOps as you've updated your build agents. When will the fix be deployed to Azure?

This allows to build Node.js at the (temporary) cost of longer build times. Refs: #38872 Refs: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/releases/tag/v16.10.0 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6465 Refs: dotnet/msbuild#6373 PR-URL: #38873 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gerhard Stöbich <deb2001-github@yahoo.de>

Forgind added the Servicing-consider label May 19, 2021

Forgind changed the base branch from main to vs16.10 May 19, 2021 23:02

KirillOsenkov reviewed May 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

Forgind added 2 commits May 19, 2021 16:41

Do not use Exclude

b00d82c

Exclude takes a snapshot of what we're excluding. We change the Enumerable mid-enumeration, which makes that invalid.

Add test

94ce625

Forgind force-pushed the fix-except-cache-problem branch from 2491470 to 94ce625 Compare May 19, 2021 23:41

rainersigwald approved these changes May 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

KirillOsenkov approved these changes May 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

rainersigwald changed the title ~~Fix except cache problem~~ Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 May 20, 2021

Bump version to 16.10.1

d6a27dd

rainersigwald force-pushed the fix-except-cache-problem branch from e32bd4c to d6a27dd Compare May 20, 2021 19:21

rainersigwald merged commit 2fd48ab into dotnet:vs16.10 May 20, 2021

Forgind deleted the fix-except-cache-problem branch May 20, 2021 20:01

KirillOsenkov mentioned this pull request May 25, 2021

Merge latest 16.10 including a fix for a break mrward/msbuild#2

Merged

targos mentioned this pull request May 31, 2021

Windows build fails with Visual Studio 2019 v16.10 nodejs/node#38872

Closed

targos mentioned this pull request May 31, 2021

build: work around bug in MSBuild v16.10.0 nodejs/node#38873

Merged

marcpopMSFT added Servicing-approved and removed Servicing-consider labels Jun 1, 2021

richardlau mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2021

build: apply workaround for msbuild 16.10.0 only nodejs/node#38930

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 #6465

Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 #6465

Forgind commented May 19, 2021 •

edited by rainersigwald

Loading

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

Forgind May 19, 2021

rainersigwald May 20, 2021

KirillOsenkov May 20, 2021

elikrief commented May 31, 2021

ben-may commented Jun 2, 2021

rainersigwald commented Jun 2, 2021

ben-may commented Jun 2, 2021

john-hynes commented Jun 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 #6465

Building a subset of a VS solution at the command line causes MSB4057 #6465

Conversation

Forgind commented May 19, 2021 • edited by rainersigwald Loading

Summary

Customer impact

Regression?

Changes Made

Testing

Risk

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KirillOsenkov May 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Forgind May 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rainersigwald May 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KirillOsenkov May 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

elikrief commented May 31, 2021

ben-may commented Jun 2, 2021

rainersigwald commented Jun 2, 2021

ben-may commented Jun 2, 2021

john-hynes commented Jun 8, 2021 • edited Loading

Forgind commented May 19, 2021 •

edited by rainersigwald

Loading

john-hynes commented Jun 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading