This is a low-tech solution alternative to the options proposed in #4682
- Search `[[bin]]`s within all packages in the registry (which aren't
tracked atm), suggesting to `cargo install` what is found
- Check if `cargo-<cmd>` is in the registry, suggesting `cargo install
if it is
By suggesting `cargo search`, we are giving them a tool so they can
verify if the package is what they want (a `cargo info` would help as a
next step).
Is is needed?
- New users might not know of `cargo search` but they can search on
crates.io
- New users might not be aware of the `cargo-<cmd>` naming pattern
Seems like this can still offer some benefit
Fixes#4682
feat(embedded): Hack in code fence support
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This is to allow us to get feedback on the design proposed
[on zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Embedding.20cargo.20manifests.20in.20rust.20source/near/391427092)
to verify we want to make an RFC for this syntax.
````rust
#!/usr/bin/env cargo
```cargo
[dependencies]
clap = { version = "4.2", features = ["derive"] }
```
use clap::Parser;
#[derive(Parser, Debug)]
#[clap(version)]
struct Args {
#[clap(short, long, help = "Path to config")]
config: Option<std::path::PathBuf>,
}
fn main() {
let args = Args::parse();
println!("{:?}", args);
}
````
### How should we test and review this PR?
The tests were updated in a separate commit to ensure there was no regression while then migrating to the new syntax to make sure it worked.
This involves some future work
- Removing doc comment support
- Getting the syntax approved and implemented
- Migrating to rustc support for the syntax
#12207 was updated to record these items so we don't lose track of them
The previous status line was a little awkward in the way it combined
both counts. I don't think showing the directories is particularly
interesting, so they are only displayed when no files are deleted.
fix(embedded): Always generate valid package names
### What does this PR try to resolve?
The sanitization logic uses a placeholder for the first character that isn't valid in the first character position. #12329 took the approach of always using `_` which has the problem of mixing separators if the user used `-` or we had other placeholders to insert. Instead, this takes the approach of stripping the leading invalid characters and using a placeholder name if nothing is left.
Fixes#12330
### How should we test and review this PR?
Per-commit. The first adds tests so the change in behavior can be observed over each additional commit.
### Additional information
I was also hoping to make the binary name not use placeholders by setting `bin.name` to `file_stem` but then I got
```
Compiling s-h-w-c- v0.0.0 (/home/epage/src/personal/cargo/target/tmp/cit/t133/foo)
error: invalid character `'.'` in crate name: `s_h.w§c!`
error: invalid character `'§'` in crate name: `s_h.w§c!`
error: invalid character `'!'` in crate name: `s_h.w§c!`
error: could not compile `s-h-w-c-` (bin "s-h.w§c!") due to 3 previous errors
```
I decided to not get into what are or aren't valid characters according to rustc.
- `cargo pkgid` is unsupported because we can't (yet) generate valid
pkgids for embedded manifests. Adding support for this would be a
step towards workspace support
- `cargo package` and `cargo publish` are being deferred. These would
be more important for `[lib]` support. `cargo install` for `[[bin]]`s
is a small case and As single-file packages are fairly restrictive, a
`[[bin]]` is a lower priority.
The goal is that we shouldn't interefere with end-user output when
"cargo script"s are used programmatically. The only way to detect this
is when piping. CI will also look like this.
My thought is that if someone does want to do `#!/usr/bin/env -S cargo -v`, it
should have a consistent meaning between local development
(`cargo run --manifest-path`) and "script mode" (`cargo`), so I
effectively added a new verbosity level in these cases. To get normal
output in all cases, add a `-v` like the tests do. Do `-vv` if you want
the normal `-v` mode. If you want it always quiet, do `--quiet`.
I want to see the default verbosity for interactive "script mode" a bit
quieter to the point that all normal output cargo makes is cleared before
running the built binary. I am holding off on that now as that could
tie into bigger conversations / refactors
(see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/246057-t-cargo/topic/Re-thinking.20cargo's.20output).
fix: Allow embedded manifests in all commands
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This is a part of #12207.
One of the goals is for embedded manifests to be a first class citizen. If you have a script, you should be able to run tests on it, for example.
This expands the error check from just `Cargo.toml` to also single-file packages so you can use it in `--manifest-path`.
This, however, does mean that these *can* be used in places that likely won't work yet, like `cargo publish`.
### How should we test and review this PR?
By commit. We introduce tests for basic commands and then implement and refine the support for this.
### Additional information
Other information you want to mention in this PR, such as prior arts,
future extensions, an unresolved problem, or a TODO list.
I originally centralized the error reporting until I realized it likely
is intentionally not centralized so we report errors in terms of the
arguments the user provided.
This puts the lockfile back into a target directory in the users home,
like before #12268.
Another idea that came up was to move the workspace root to be in the
target directory (which would effectively be like pre-#12268) but I
think that is a bit hacky / misleading.
This does mean that the lockfile is buried away from the user and they
can't pass it along with their script. In most cases I've dealt with,
this would be fine. When the lockfile is needed, they will also most
likely have a workspace, so it shoud have a local lockfile in that case.
The inbetween case is something that needs further evaluation for
whether we should handle it and how.
fix(embedded): Don't auto-discover build.rs files
With #12268, we moved the manifest root to be the scripts parent
directory, making it so auto-discovery might pick some things up.
We previously ensured `auto*` don't pick things up but missed `build.rs`
This is now addressed.
With #12268, we moved the manifest root to be the scripts parent
directory, making it so auto-discovery might pick some things up.
We previously ensured `auto*` don't pick things up but missed `build.rs`
This is now addressed.
This was broken in #12268 when we stopped using an intermediate
`Cargo.toml` file.
Unlike pre-#12268,
- We are hashing the path, rather than the content, with the assumption
that people change content more frequently than the path
- We are using a simpler hash than `blake3` in the hopes that we can get
away with it
Unlike the Pre-RFC demo
- We are not forcing a single target dir for all scripts in the hopes
that we get #5931
To parse the manifest, we have to write it out so our regular manifest
loading code could handle it. This updates the manifest parsing code to
handle it.
This doesn't mean this will work everywhere in all cases though. For
example, ephemeral workspaces parses a manifest from the SourceId and
these won't have valid SourceIds.
As a consequence, `Cargo.lock` and `CARGO_TARGET_DIR` are changing from being next to
the temp manifest to being next to the script. This still isn't the
desired behavior but stepping stones.
This also exposes the fact that we didn't disable `autobins` like the
documentation says we should.
Background: the hash existed for sharing a target directory. That code isn't
implemented yet and a per-user build cache might remove the need for it,
so let's remove it for now and more carefully weigh adding it back in.
Immediate: This reduces the chance of hitting file length issues on Windows.
Generally: This is a bit hacky and for an official solution, we should
probably try to find a better way. This could become more important as
single-file packages are allowed in workspaces.
