-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 141
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
Use cargo-xtask in CI #207
Conversation
Oh, and this removes the non-working i2s-peripheral-demo since we now check that every example has test metadata (cc @kalkyl) |
Nice! Yeah i'm just finishing up a new PR tonight where I changed the implementation to work along the lines of the |
Oh, awesome! |
[target.'cfg(all(target_arch = "arm", target_os = "none"))'] | ||
runner = 'arm-none-eabi-gdb' | ||
rustflags = [ | ||
"-C", "link-arg=-Tlink.x", | ||
] | ||
|
||
[build] | ||
target = "thumbv7em-none-eabihf" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is this gone? I would assume this is still relevant for development?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sort of. We now explicitly pass the right target in CI, and I've found this default to be a bit confusing since it doesn't work on nRF51, the nRF52810, and the nRF9160.
Demos can add their own .cargo/config
if they want though, that should make development easier.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I guess it does work on the nRF9160, but it's not usually the target you want to use there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm ok, so I guess you suggest just using the build script during development I guess :) I always hit cargo build out of habit =D but the change & its reasoning is fair enough for me!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, you can still do that if you cd
to the demo project you're editing and add a .cargo/config
there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't care about the demo projects ;) I care about building the HAL if I change something (which hasn't happened in a log time).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The HALs should all build even for x86_64 (at least that's how docs.rs generates documentation for them)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does cortex-m really build for x86 targets?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, it goes out of its way to ensure that
Going to merge this tomorrow unless there are objections :) |
Tests can be run with
cargo test -p xtask
, no bash required.cargo test
does not yet work, I'll see if it's possible to get that working after this PR.My plan is to use
cargo-xtask
as a general automation tool for releases (allowing automatically bumping versions,html_root_url
, and the changelog).