[6.1] Fix duplicate modulemap errors with macro and plugin deps (#8472) #8491
Conversation
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
…8472) We were including flags to hook up modulemaps and include files to C library dependencies in macros and plugin tools through to the modules that depend on those. This adds the capability to prune the depth first searches through the dependencies to ensure these are skipped when crossing macro and plugin boundaries.
dschaefer2
requested review from
bnbarham,
MaxDesiatov,
jakepetroules,
francescomikulis,
xedin,
shawnhyam,
bripeticca,
plemarquand,
owenv and
bkhouri
as code owners
dschaefer2
changed the title
dschaefer2
changed the title
|
Cherry picking #8472 |
|
Also including changes in #8485 |
|
Had to revert #8485. Will try again. |
bkhouri
reviewed
Apr 17, 2025
| // depends on. | ||
| for case .module(let dependency, let description) in swiftTarget.recursiveDependencies(using: self) { | ||
| // builds against | ||
| for case .module(let dependency, let description) in swiftTarget.recursiveLinkDependencies(using: self) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the change on main calls swiftTarget.recursiveDependencies. Is it intentional to call this recursiveLinkDependencies?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a new change on main to fix to call LinkDeps. This isn't a cherry pick any more, I am fixing both at the same time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| for case .module(let dependency, let description) in swiftTarget.recursiveLinkDependencies(using: self) { | |
| for case .module(let dependency, let description) in swiftTarget.recursiveLinkDependencies(using: self) { |
| XCTAssertNoDiagnostics(observability.diagnostics) | ||
|
|
||
| let myLib = try XCTUnwrap(plan.targets.first(where: { $0.module.name == "MyLib" })).swift() | ||
| XCTAssertFalse(myLib.additionalFlags.contains(where: { $0.contains("-tool")}), "flags shouldn't contain tools items") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
note: the change on branch main has $0.contains("-tool/include"). Is it expected that release/6.1 omit the /include portion of the flag?
|
The main fix is here: #8524 |
Missing the fix for link dependencies to also capture dependencies from test targets to macros.
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@swift-ci please test windows |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
We were including flags to hook up modulemaps and include files to C library dependencies in macros and plugin tools through to the modules that depend on those. This adds the capability to prune the depth first searches through the dependencies to ensure these are skipped when crossing macro and plugin boundaries.