Skip to content
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

Thoughts on how to add --rustopts #86

Open
GregBowyer opened this issue May 21, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Thoughts on how to add --rustopts #86

GregBowyer opened this issue May 21, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@GregBowyer
Copy link
Contributor

Hi all,

rightly? probably wrongly our current build configuration lets developers opt into using the sanitizers via bazelrc configurations.

One of these configurations abuses --copt to add -fsanitize=address to the cflags we compile under, as a result we get asan binaries.

I think I can make this happen with platforms / toolchains in the rust_rules, but it might be good to still think about how and if there is a way to specify flags for rustc in a more adhoc fashion.

Not urgent more a discussion point.

@mfarrugi
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't quite follow, do you mean that we should support something different than (or in addition to) the rustc_flags parameter supported by the rules?

@hlopko
Copy link
Member

hlopko commented May 24, 2018

This doc (once finished) describes our plans with the Skylark rules and bazel options: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vc8v-kXjvgZOdQdnxPTaV0rrLxtP2XwnD2tAZlYJOqw/edit#heading=h.pn8nbhno42p5. Up until then there's not much we can do here (except hacks using --define or similar).

@UebelAndre
Copy link
Collaborator

@hlopko do you know if there was a recent PR that solved for this? I vaguely remember something that seemed relevant. Will do some more digging later

@hlopko
Copy link
Member

hlopko commented Mar 29, 2021

I think you meant #566?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants