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

[release/5.0-rc2] Update dependencies from mono/linker #42073

Conversation

dotnet-maestro[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@dotnet-maestro dotnet-maestro bot commented Sep 10, 2020

This pull request updates the following dependencies

From https://github.com/mono/linker

  • Subscription: efd96323-729a-47d5-afe2-08d849eee71f
  • Build: 20200930.1
  • Date Produced: 9/30/2020 8:45 AM
  • Commit: bdddd557535b711c1e663392783afd2c11534a91
  • Branch: refs/heads/release/5.0

Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20459.2
@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
Copy link
Collaborator

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

@jeffschwMSFT
Copy link
Member

@agocke @vitek-karas what updates are we expecting from mono/linker?

@mmitche
Copy link
Member

mmitche commented Sep 10, 2020

@agocke @vitek-karas what updates are we expecting from mono/linker?

@marek-safar Contacted me about this this morning.

@agocke
Copy link
Member

agocke commented Sep 10, 2020

We have two things that we're considering: a crashing bug, and moving the linker itself to target 5.0. My current understanding is that the linker can, but does not need to flow into runtime.

For the SDK, that's under the VS bar, and according to the VS schedule is open for check-in for bug fixes. Does this sound right?

@agocke
Copy link
Member

agocke commented Sep 10, 2020

Since I know of no linker bugs which we are considering that affect runtime itself, my proposal is that we remove the automatic integration to avoid churn, and only check the linker into the SDK.

Does anyone know of an issue with that?

@marek-safar
Copy link
Contributor

Does anyone know of an issue with that?

The runtime is the only integration (complex) test suite we have. By not flowing the changes in we'll make it harder for us to use it to validate any possible further fixes.

Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20460.4
@jeffschwMSFT
Copy link
Member

The runtime is the only integration (complex) test suite we have.

Agreed. Is it possible to get CI validation and not merge? We have seen subtle issues be introduced with new linker versions in dotnet/runtime. Given the current version has some bake time I am more comfortable with it.

With that said, do we have good insight into all the changes that have occurred since our last dotnet/runtime integration?

@agocke
Copy link
Member

agocke commented Sep 10, 2020

dotnet/linker@e56c9e4...ec64f67

Changes are: fix for a customer-found crashing bug, building against the proper 5.0 cecil submodule, and dependency updates.

Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20461.1
@sbomer
Copy link
Member

sbomer commented Sep 11, 2020

The plan discussed with @eerhardt and @vitek-karas was to stop flowing into runtime. We actually did turn off flow to runtime in RC1, but looks like someone added it back when runtime branched for RC2. That said, I like the suggestion to use this for validation, without merging.

Copy link
Member

@mmitche mmitche left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Requesting changes to avoid accidental auto-merge

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 16, 2020

Tagging subscribers to this area: @ViktorHofer
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rc.2.20468.1
Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rc.2.20475.4
Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks
 From Version 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 -> To Version 5.0.0-rtm.20480.1
@ViktorHofer
Copy link
Member

@mmitche @marek-safar I think a linker ingestion was just approved in tactics, is that right? Should we merge this in?

@marek-safar
Copy link
Contributor

No, we can close this one as there will be a newer update for release/5.0. The regression fix will flow via dotnet/sdk

@dotnet-maestro dotnet-maestro bot deleted the darc-release/5.0-rc2-d726503d-1cf8-4c13-81b1-62d6352de7db branch September 30, 2020 09:51
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 7, 2020
@danmoseley danmoseley added area-codeflow for labeling automated codeflow and removed area-Infrastructure labels Jul 28, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
area-codeflow for labeling automated codeflow
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants