Proposal: special toolchain names referring to particular override levels

Đang mở
  • Có gì không ổn?
#5,025 14 bình luận 2 reaction 1 người được giao Xem trên GitHub

Maintainer thường phản hồi trong vòng 1 ngày

@14elias đang làm issue này rồi.

Từ ngày 6/9/2026.

Đánh giá

Issue này chưa được đánh giá.

Mô tả

enhancement

Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/issues/4059.

Since https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/pull/4932 it has been decided that only characters satisfying GeneralSecurityProfile::identifier_allowed() should be allowed in rustup toolchain names.

This has opened up new possibilities for us to assemble our special/reserved toolchain names as needed with special characters such as @ or =.

Following up the above efforts, noting the five levels of rustup toolchain overrides:

  1. The +<toolchain> override.
  2. The RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN environment variable.
  3. The rustup override set override.
  4. The rust-toolchain.toml override.
  5. The default toolchain.

... aiming to address https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/issues/4391, I propose the following changes:

  • Make env and default new reserved words in addition to the existing none.
  • Introduce the following toolchain syntax:
    • env: Refers to the toolchain that should be activated by the env override.
      • This will not be useful per se but sometime people want to be explicit, e.g. rustup run env cargo instead of cargo.
    • dir=<dir>: Refers to the toolchain that should be activated by the dir override on <dir> or its fallback dirs.
      • e.g. cargo +dir=./crates/download
    • file=<file>: Refers to the toolchain that should be activated by the TOML override in <file> which follows the rust-toolchain.toml schema.
      • e.g. cargo +file=windows.toml, for a Windows-specific rust-toolchain.toml setup.
    • default: Refers to the default toolchain. Bails out if none is set.
      • e.g. cargo +default

Concerns

  • How should we handle the error for dir= and file= when the dir/TOML override doesn't exist? Should we bail out or warn and fall back to the next level?
    • My guess is that we should warn and fall back.
  • Consider the relation between this proposal and #4945. Should we resolve the toolchain name when the user issues rustup default file=windows.toml? If so, should we fully resolve or partially resolve it?
    • My guess is that we should partially resolve to an official or a custom toolchain name (that isn't a reserved word and doesn't have special characters like =).
  • Can we use this in RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN (is RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN not guaranteed to be a parsable toolchain name by downstreams other than rustup)? If we can, we will also resolve #2793 at the same time by setting RUST_TOOLCHAIN=default.
    • I think we probably can.

Note

This also simplifies https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/10098 because this involves changing the override lookup logic to work with arbitrary base paths. In that case, we'd just need to alter the path for our dir/TOML override source by prefixing it with the path passed via cargo -C.

Ngôn ngữ chính
Rust
Star
7.1k
Fork
1.1k
Merge trung bình
1 ngày 5 giờ
Pull request đã merge (30 ngày)
40

Chuẩn bị môi trường

Bắt đầu từ đâu

  1. Đọc hết issue, rồi đọc hướng dẫn đóng góp của dự án.
  2. Bình luận trên issue rằng bạn sẽ nhận — tránh hai người làm cùng một việc.
  3. Fork repository và làm thay đổi trên một nhánh.
  4. Mở pull request có tham chiếu số hiệu của issue.

Issue khác của rust-lang/rustup

Tất cả issue của rust-lang/rustup

Issue tương tự

Thêm issue về Rust

Nhận issue mới trong hộp thư của bạn

Bản tóm tắt ngắn những issue GitHub phù hợp với người mới.