Make `git::use_the_cli` test truly locale independent
### What does this PR try to resolve?
The current `git::use_the_cli` test part the output of Git but that output is locale dependant, making it fail on my non-english system.
Specifically this part of the test is local-dependent:
```
From [..]
* [new ref] [..] -> origin/HEAD[..]
```
Adding the `LC_ALL=C` env to the cargo invocation solve the issue, making the test locale independent.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Trying putting a different `LC_ALL` locale and the test will fail without this PR and will not fail with my PR.
Silence warnings running embedded unittests.
The `util::toml::embedded::test_expand` unittests were printing warnings directly to stderr, circumventing the libtest override. They were displaying ``warning: `package.edition` is unspecified, defaulting to `2021` ``. That warning doesn't look particularly important for those tests, so this changes it to swallow the output.
We may want to have some kind of utility function for generating a GlobalContext for testing purposes that does this, since this is a repeated pattern.
Fix warning output in build_with_symlink_to_path_dependency_with_build_script_in_git
The test `build_with_symlink_to_path_dependency_with_build_script_in_git` was emitting a large warning block (in my case, about init.defaultBranch) because it was running `git` without filtering its output. It's not clear to me why this test was shelling out to `git` instead of using the built-in test support functions. From what I can tell, this should be exactly equivalent, and silences the warning output.
Temporarily fix standard_lib tests on linux.
This fixes the standard_lib tests which are broken in the latest nightly. The latest nightly now requires rust-lld to be in the sysroot for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. This broke these tests which were trying to verify that the standard library is not required. This temporarily removes this validation, but we should have some way of enforcing it (https://github.com/rust-lang/wg-cargo-std-aware/issues/31).
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125246
Add special `check-cfg` lint config for the `unexpected_cfgs` lint
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This PR adds a special `check-cfg` lint config for the `unexpected_cfgs` lint, as it was decided by T-cargo (in today's meeting).
The goal of this lint config is to provide a simple and cost-less alternative to the build-script `cargo::rustc-check-cfg` instruction.
```toml
[lints.rust]
unexpected_cfgs = { level = "warn", check-cfg = ['cfg(foo, values("bar"))'] }
```
### How should we test and review this PR?
I recommand reviewing commit by commit; and looking at all the new tests added in `check_cfg.rs`, I tried making them as exhaustive as I could, many of them are very similar to their non-config counterpart.
### Additional information
I didn't add *(actually removed from the 1st version of this PR)* the possibility to omit the `level` field if `check-cfg` is specified, https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/13913#discussion_r1600609229.
Regarding the implementation, I tried making it is as straight forward as possible, nothing over-engineered or complex.
r? `@epage` (or `@weihanglo` maybe)
Those new tests tries to be as exhaustive as possible while being
reasonable in the number of them. To do so we try to check for
check/doc/test/build-script/features with a the `check-cfg` config.
Many of those tests are very similar to their non-config counterpart.
This permits things like this to be recognized and passed to
rustc/rustdoc.
```rust
[lints.rust]
unexpected_cfgs = { level = "warn", check-cfg = ["cfg(foo)"] }
```
test: set safe.directory for git repo in apache container
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Failure in container tests due to a new version of `git` package in Alpine Linux Package repository.
See also <https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/13913#issuecomment-2113712049>
### How should we test and review this PR?
Alpine Linux Package repository 3.19 just bumped git package to 2.43.4 from 2.43.0.
The docker image `httpd:2.4-alpine` we use in container tests failed due to the git version bump.
The `httpd` log shown that
```
240.10.0.1 - - [16/May/2024:03:52:36 +0000] "GET /repos/bar.git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack HTTP/1.1" 500 -
[16/May/2024:03:52:36 +0000] 240.10.0.1 TLSv1.3 TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 "GET /repos/bar.git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack HTTP/1.1" -
fatal: detected dubious ownership in repository at '/repos/bar.git'
To add an exception for this directory, call:
git config --global --add safe.directory /repos/bar.git
```
git/git@f4aa8c8bb1 is likely the commit causing problems.
So I ended up adding `git config --system --add safe.directory '*'` to the Dockerfile of apache container.
Note that we need `--system` instead of `--global` because `httpd` are running under the other user www-data, not root.
refactor: misc refactors for `ops::resolve`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This is a preparation for another `-Zpatch-files` experiment,
so that the future PR can move things around easier without too many conflicts.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Generally they shouldn't affect anything existing behavior.
a6230e348b might be a bit dubious,
though I believe preloading workspace members is kinda idempotent
and registering patches/lockfile never cares about it.
### Additional information
Preserve file permissions on unix during `write_atomic`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Fixes#13896.
> When you run `cargo add`, it changes the file permissions of `Cargo.toml` to 600 (user read+write only). This is a little bit painful when you're building the code as a different user than the user writing the code, for example if you're running the code in a container. This applies to `cargo remove` as well. I tested this behaviour on Cargo 1.78.0 and nightly.
I'm not entirely sure how permissions are handled on Windows, but the tempfile lib [doesn't seem to support them](https://docs.rs/tempfile/3.10.1/tempfile/struct.Builder.html#windows-and-others), so I haven't changed the behaviour on Windows.
Only the user/group/other read/write/execute permission bits are copied.
This PR sets the permissions ~twice~ once:
~1. When creating the file. This has the umask applied, but means that we don't create a file that is more permissive than the original.~
2. After the file has been created. This doesn't apply the umask, resulting in the file having the same u/g/o r/w/x permissions as the original file.
Since this PR changes a util function, it has a wider scope than just changing the behaviour of `cargo add` and `cargo remove`. `write_atomic` is called from the following functions:
- [`migrate_manifests`](4de0094ac7/src/cargo/ops/fix.rs (L340))
- [`update_manifest_with_new_member`](4de0094ac7/src/cargo/ops/cargo_new.rs (L1008))
- [`LocalManifest::write`](4de0094ac7/src/cargo/util/toml_mut/manifest.rs (L299))
- [`gc_workspace`](4de0094ac7/src/bin/cargo/commands/remove.rs (L274))
### How should we test and review this PR?
Unit test was added (`cargo test -p cargo-util write_atomic_permissions`).
Fix docs for unstable script feature
### What does this PR try to resolve?
* [Recent change](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/13861) to accepted syntax in the script feature is not reflected in the documentation.
### How should we test and review this PR?
* Verify that this documentation is consistent with syntax expected.
### Additional information
N/A
Refactor cargo lint tests
In #13621, it was brought up that [the lints tests are nested more deeply than other UI tests](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/13621#discussion_r1538065181). This got me wondering if there was a better way to structure all the lint tests.
What I came up with was:
- Lints should not have UI tests, only parts of the diagnostic system, i.e., how warnings, errors, notes, etc., look
- This is because UI tests should focus on parts of the system that make up each lint's output
- We can always add UI tests for each lint if desired
- All tests related to the linting system should live in `tests/testsuite/lints/`
- Tests related to `[lints.cargo]` should stay in `lints_table.rs` as it is for the whole lints table
- Each lint will get a file in `lints/` for all of its tests
- This makes `lints/mod.rs` smaller and targeted only at tests for the linting system itself
- It makes it much easier to know where to place a test
Old syntax suggestion
Fixes#13868.
The build error in the issue will now include a suggestion:
```
Compiling zerocopy v0.8.0-alpha.9
error: the `cargo::` syntax for build script output instructions was added in Rust 1.77.0, but the minimum supported Rust version of `zerocopy v0.8.0-alpha.9` is 1.56.0.
Consider using the old `cargo:` syntax in front of `rustc-check-cfg=`.
See https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/build-scripts.html#outputs-of-the-build-script for more information about build script outputs.
```
The suggestion is only included for reserved prefixes.
A test has been added.
