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

Don't use an empty RUSTC_WRAPPER #5985

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 6, 2018

Conversation

dwijnand
Copy link
Member

@dwijnand dwijnand commented Sep 5, 2018

Fixes #5588

@rust-highfive
Copy link

r? @matklad

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 6, 2018

📌 Commit 9b67b27 has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 6, 2018

⌛ Testing commit 9b67b27 with merge 7afa449...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 6, 2018
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 6, 2018

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing 7afa449 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 9b67b27 into rust-lang:master Sep 6, 2018
@dwijnand dwijnand deleted the fix-rustc-wrapper-unset branch September 6, 2018 17:44
@ehuss ehuss added this to the 1.30.0 milestone Feb 6, 2022
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 24, 2022
Make the empty rustc-wrapper test more explicit.

This changes the test for an empty RUSTC_WRAPPER environment variable to make it explicit that it doesn't just ignore the environment variable, but that it also essentially unsets any config-loaded value.  It's not clear if this implication was known at the time it was added in #5985, but I don't think we can change it, and it can be useful.
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RUSTC_WRAPPER= should use no wrapper instead of attempting to run the command ""
6 participants