We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Reproduction:
$ wget -O rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz https://static.rust-lang.org/dist/2017-07-23/rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz $ tar xf rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/ $ file rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/rust*c rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/rustc: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=6cd5b2aab6699d6026ad53d7e8456dbb86fe40a3, not stripped rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/rustdoc: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=35347f46181fd4543575852d2cee9eaef6d531d1, not stripped
Expected result, from 2017-07-22 tarball:
rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/rustc: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, ARM, EABI5 version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3, for GNU/Linux 3.2.72, not stripped rustc-nightly-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf/rustc/bin/rustdoc: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, ARM, EABI5 version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3, for GNU/Linux 3.2.72, not stripped
AFAICT, cargo and rls tarballs are okay.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
All non-x86 rustc tarballs are borked. I've seen x86_64 binaries for MIPS64el too.
Almost certainly #43059, but I'm not particularly familiar with that code.
Sorry, something went wrong.
cc @Mark-Simulacrum @alexcrichton
Same as #43427.
Indeed! Closing in favor of #43427
No branches or pull requests
Reproduction:
Expected result, from 2017-07-22 tarball:
AFAICT, cargo and rls tarballs are okay.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: