cfallin commented on issue #5619:
The diff itself looks fine here; I'll trust that this section type is what is needed :-)
Regarding CI:
- Can you see if you can consolidate deps back to one version of
object
? There's probably another crate somewhere still using the old version.- One of us will need to vet the diff for the
object
upgrade; I'll get to this in a bit if no one else does first!
afonso360 commented on issue #5619:
Can you see if you can consolidate deps back to one version of object? There's probably another crate somewhere still using the old version.
Did the best I could, we are now only duplicating the
hashbrown
crate. The old version is a dependency ofindexmap
which itself is a dependency of 3-4 other crates, and I figured this would be a good place to stop.Also
hashbrown
has moved some of their API that we used behind a feature flag.One of us will need to vet the diff for the object upgrade; I'll get to this in a bit if no one else does first!
:+1:, You also recently did a similar vet for
object
up to0.30
in https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/pull/5434#issuecomment-1350337637 so we're just missing0.30 -> 0.30.3
.
cfallin commented on issue #5619:
@afonso360 would you be willing to update this with an exemption for the
hashbrown
version duplication to the cargo-deny config (if the issue hasn't gone away with updates in the meantime)? Otherwise I think this PR is ready to go...
afonso360 commented on issue #5619:
I've rebased this and added the exception, but I think we still have the same issue with cargo vet of missing a few vet's
afonso360 edited a comment on issue #5619:
I've rebased this and added the exception, but I think we still have the same issue with cargo vet of missing a few vet's similar to #5550.
afonso360 commented on issue #5619:
Rebased this on top of main, and that resolves pretty much all of our vet issues. With the exception of
object 0.30.1 -> 0.30.3
, that update is introduced in this PR sinceSectionKind::ReadOnlyDataWithRel
didn't exist before.
afonso360 commented on issue #5619:
Thanks for unblocking this! :tada:
afonso360 commented on issue #5619:
The merge queue failure seems to have been sporadic, I retried the job and it passed. I'm going to retry the merge queue again.
Last updated: Dec 23 2024 at 13:07 UTC