-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
Add format option to cargo tree to print the package version requirement
#16192
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
Draft
devodev
wants to merge
5
commits into
rust-lang:master
Choose a base branch
from
devodev:pr/devodev/tree-show-constraints
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+193
−9
Draft
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0949c7e
Add unit tests for cargo tree format parser
devodev 8e7b557
Support hyphens in cargo tree format parser
devodev 7a01106
Update cargo tree format tests with version requirement scenarios
devodev 995e693
Add version requirement format option to cargo tree
devodev 9381123
Update cargo tree command docs with new version requirement option
devodev File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Am I misreading things? This says
foohas^1.0when it instead has:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right, this version requirement seems to belong to other-dep. I think I see what's happening. We don't consider the parent when registering the version requirement in the lookup map, so it's probably replacing previous entries for the same package?
I think using NodeID as index should make this unique.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As a forewarning, a problem I suspect we'll see when we have two different, compatible version requirements on the same package and
--invertit is that we'll only see one of them.version requirements are more of a property of edges and not nodes. We don't annotate edges. Is that good enough, a blocker for this feature, or a cause to re-think some base assumptions?
As an example of the latter, maybe for
--invert, we put the version requirement on the dependent package and not the dependency.