Skip to content

Support different lintcheck CARGO_TARGET_DIR env variables #14859

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

blyxyas
Copy link
Member

@blyxyas blyxyas commented May 21, 2025

Make lintcheck support different CARGO_TARGET_DIR, do not hardcode target (useful for perf)

changelog:none

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 21, 2025

r? @dswij

rustbot has assigned @dswij.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label May 21, 2025
@blyxyas
Copy link
Member Author

blyxyas commented May 21, 2025

Wait 1 single minute @dswij before merging, I think I have an improvement. (Using the same lintcheck/downloads directory to avoid downloading the crates multiple times)

@rust-cloud-vms rust-cloud-vms bot force-pushed the better-target-lintcheck branch from c6911a0 to f1ad1cd Compare May 21, 2025 17:24
@blyxyas
Copy link
Member Author

blyxyas commented May 21, 2025

Ok, so I scraped the downloads directory in the end. We still maintain separate sources directories and on perf shared_target_dir is still being wiped for every run.

This makes comparing several different Clippy binaries via lintcheck heaps more comfortable.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants