RISC-V GNU/Linux as host platform
This PR add a new builder named `dist-riscv64-linux` that builds the compiler toolchain for RISC-V 64-bit GNU/Linux.
r? @alexcrichton
build dist for x86_64-unknown-illumos
This change creates a new Docker image, "dist-x86_64-illumos", and sets
things up to build the full set of "dist" packages for illumos hosts, so
that illumos users can use "rustup" to install packages. It also
adjusts the manifest builder to expect complete toolchains for this
platform.
In our GitHub Actions setup macOS is too unreliable to gate on it, but
the other builders work fine. This commit splits the macOS builders into
a separate job (called auto-fallible), allowing us to gate on the auto
job without failing due to macOS spurious failures.
This change creates a new Docker image, "dist-x86_64-illumos", and sets
things up to build the full set of "dist" packages for illumos hosts, so
that illumos users can use "rustup" to install packages. It also
adjusts the manifest builder to expect complete toolchains for this
platform.
We need to add runners designed for an aarch64 host system, and it'd be
nice to return an error message if someone tries to run an image
designed for an host architecture in another one.
To start the work on this, this commit moves all the existing builders
in the host-x86_64 directory, and changes the run.sh script to look up
the image in the correct directory based on the host architecture.
Remove legacy InnoSetup GUI installer
On Windows the InnoSetup `.exe` installer was superseded by the MSI installer long ago. It's no longer needed.
The `.exe` installer hasn't been linked from the [other installation methods](https://forge.rust-lang.org/infra/other-installation-methods.html#standalone) page in many years. As far as I can tell the intent was always to remove this installer once the MSI proved itself. Though admittedly both installers feel very "legacy" at this point.
Removing this would mean we only maintain one Windows GUI installer and would speed up the distribution phase.
As a result of removing InnoSetup, this closes#24397
ci: allow gating GHA on everything but macOS
In our GitHub Actions setup macOS is too unreliable to gate on it, but the other builders work fine. This commit splits the macOS builders into a separate job (called `auto-fallible`), allowing us to gate on the auto job without failing due to macOS spurious failures.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-central-station/issues/848
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
In our GitHub Actions setup macOS is too unreliable to gate on it, but
the other builders work fine. This commit splits the macOS builders into
a separate job (called auto-fallible), allowing us to gate on the auto
job without failing due to macOS spurious failures.
Remove vestigial CI job msvc-aux.
This CI job isn't really doing anything, so it seems prudent to remove it.
For some history:
* This was introduced in #48809 when the msvc job was split in two to keep it under 2 hours (oh the good old days). At the time, this check-aux job did a bunch of things:
* tidy
* src/test/pretty
* src/test/run-pass/pretty
* src/test/run-fail/pretty
* src/test/run-pass-valgrind/pretty
* src/test/run-pass-fulldeps/pretty
* src/test/run-fail-fulldeps/pretty
* Tidy was removed in #60777.
* run-pass and run-pass-fulldeps moved to UI in #63029
* src/test/pretty removed in #58140
* src/test/run-fail moved to UI in #71185
* run-fail-fulldeps removed in #51285
Over time through attrition, the job was left with one lonely thing: `src/test/run-pass-valgrind/pretty`. And of course, this wasn't actually running the "pretty" tests. The normal `run-pass-valgrind` tests ran, and then when it tried to run in "pretty" mode, all the tests were ignored because compiletest thought nothing had changed (apparently compiletest isn't fingerprinting the mode? Needs more investigation…). `run-pass-valgrind` is already being run as part of `x86_64-msvc-1`, so there's no need to run it here.
I've taken the liberty of removing `src/test/run-pass-valgrind/pretty` as a distinct test. I'm guessing from the other PR's that the pretty tests should now live in `src/test/pretty`, and that the team has moved away from doing pretty tests on other parts of the `src/test` tree.
While for auto, try and PR builds we only want the latest commit to be
tested, that's not true for try builds: each commit pushed to the branch
is a different PR being tested, and we want multiple PRs to be tested in
parallel if there is enough demand.
Fixes#70569
