Turn off rustc-dev-guide toolstate for now

[mark-i-m]

cc @rust-lang/wg-rustc-dev-guide @rust-lang/infra @ehuss

When we first added toolstate, the intent was to use toolstate to linkcheck PRs so that we would know which PRs break links in the guide (e.g. by moving some definition). However, these days, we are mostly getting 429 errors (too many requests) from github (not sure when this changed), and every day, there seems to be a spurious failure of some other sort. This is all despite efforts to filter out spurious failures.

Getting spurious gh pings is annoying, and we're not actually getting a lot out of this linkcheck beyond what we are getting with our CI on the guide's repo, so I'm proposing to disable this until we can figure out what might be a better path forward.

[rust-highfive]

r? @nikomatsakis

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[mark-i-m]

r? @spastorino

[spastorino]

@mark-i-m great. I'm not sure what exactly we need to remove to avoid running toolstate on rustc-dev-guide, but quickly checking the code was wondering about

rust/src/bootstrap/test.rs

Lines 1532 to 1558 in fd61d06

	#[derive(Debug, Copy, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Hash)]
	pub struct RustcGuide;
	impl Step for RustcGuide {
	type Output = ();
	const DEFAULT: bool = false;
	const ONLY_HOSTS: bool = true;
	fn should_run(run: ShouldRun<'_>) -> ShouldRun<'_> {
	run.path("src/doc/rustc-dev-guide")
	}
	fn make_run(run: RunConfig<'_>) {
	run.builder.ensure(RustcGuide);
	}
	fn run(self, builder: &Builder<'_>) {
	let src = builder.src.join("src/doc/rustc-dev-guide");
	let mut rustbook_cmd = builder.tool_cmd(Tool::Rustbook);
	let toolstate = if try_run(builder, rustbook_cmd.arg("linkcheck").arg(&src)) {
	ToolState::TestPass
	} else {
	ToolState::TestFail
	};
	builder.save_toolstate("rustc-dev-guide", toolstate);
	}
	}

and

rust/src/bootstrap/builder.rs

Line 392 in fd61d06

test::RustcGuide,

[Mark-Simulacrum]

I am unsure if this PR as-is works well enough, let's r? @pietroalbini and cc @kennytm who've done toolstate repo work recently. We'll want to be cautious and try to avoid the problem we hit last time where changes led to no pull request being able to land until we fixed toolstate...

[mark-i-m]

@spastorino, that code is eventually called from the line I deleted. IIUC this will just leave toolstate in it's current state

[pietroalbini]

I'd prefer to r? @kennytm if they're not busy, I'm not that familiar with toolstate.

[kennytm]

@bors r+

since we may turn it back on later, i'm ok with leaving the code mentioned in #71731 (comment) around.

[bors]

📌 Commit 9e43b00 has been approved by kennytm

[pietroalbini]

@bors r-

This failed in #71920 with:

error: Tool `rustc-dev-guide` was not recorded in tool state.

[kennytm]

Okay, need to comment out rustc-dev-guide from the NIGHTLY_TOOLS in src/bootstrap/toolstate.rs as well.

[kennytm]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 837c16b has been approved by kennytm

[spastorino]

I was wondering, is there a reason to not remove everything and in case we want to add this back we can just revert the PR?.

[mark-i-m]

@spastorino Is there something in particular you are concerned about? Why remove everything if we think we might add something back later?

[spastorino]

@spastorino Is there something in particular you are concerned about? Why remove everything if we think we might add something back later?

Nothing in particular, don't worry :).

[RalfJung]

rustc-dev-guide is still listed in https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate/blob/master/_data/latest.json. Looks like the toolstate was not removed completely?

[ehuss]

@RalfJung, I think it needs to be removed manually. Essentially someone needs to make a PR equivalent to rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate#17 for that entry.

[RalfJung]

@rust-lang/infra how does one go about removing a toolstate? Is manually editing the JSON really the right way?

[mark-i-m]

@RalfJung Is this causing problems somehow? I'm personally not 100% we want to completely get rid of some sort of guide toolstate...

[RalfJung]

It means that the information at https://rust-lang-nursery.github.io/rust-toolstate/ is misleading / outdated / confusing.

[mark-i-m]

I guess my question is "confusing to whom?" I understood that nobody else cared about guide toolstate (as it has been outdated/wrong for a long time).

[RalfJung]

Confusing to anyone who looks at that table and sees every non-"pass" entry as basically a bug that needs fixing (like me). I mean, that's the entire point of even having that table, if you ask me.

[mark-i-m]

rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate#18