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

Upgrade to clap 4 #3444

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 29, 2023
Merged

Upgrade to clap 4 #3444

merged 4 commits into from
Aug 29, 2023

Conversation

djc
Copy link
Contributor

@djc djc commented Aug 15, 2023

Review the changelog here: https://github.com/clap-rs/clap/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#400---2022-09-28.

Previously: #3094, which seems stalled.

Fixes #3443 and, apparently, fixes #3128.

@djc
Copy link
Contributor Author

djc commented Aug 15, 2023

The rustup_init_ui_doc_text_tests failure is confusing to me, I tried to get it lined up but the way the test fails doesn't quite make sense to me.

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for taking this on.

The first line is an expected line - rustup-init ...
The second line The installer for rustup is line 1 of the clap4 output and line 2 of the expected output.

Line 3 -Usage ... is new in the clap4 output
Line 4 + USAGE: is expected but not in the clap4 output

etc.

We're ok with changes to the help layout as long as:

  • its internally consistent between subcommands and the like
  • it is clean and readable

There was discussion about this during the clap3 upgrade - I forget whether on discord or in the clap3 PR (perhaps in both in fact).

---- expected: stdout
++++ actual:   stdout
        1 + rustup-init 1.26.0 (577bf51ae 2023-04-05)
   1    2 | The installer for rustup
   2    3 | 
   3      - Usage: rustup-init [OPTIONS]
        4 + USAGE:
        5 +     rustup-init [OPTIONS]
        6 + 
        7 + OPTIONS:
        8 +     -v, --verbose
        9 +             Enable verbose output
       10 + 
       11 +     -q, --quiet
       12 +             Disable progress output
       13 + 
       14 +     -y
       15 +             Disable confirmation prompt.
       16 + 
       17 +         --default-host <default-host>
       18 +             Choose a default host triple
       19 + 
       20 +         --default-toolchain <default-toolchain>
       21 +             Choose a default toolchain to install. Use 'none' to not install any toolchains at all
       22 + 
       23 +         --profile <profile>
       24 +             [default: default] [possible values: minimal, default, complete]
       25 + 
       26 +     -c, --component <components>...
       27 +             Component name to also install
       28 + 
       29 +     -t, --target <targets>...
       30 +             Target name to also install
       31 + 
       32 +         --no-update-default-toolchain
       33 +             Don't update any existing default toolchain after install
       34 + 
       35 +         --no-modify-path
       36 +             Don't configure the PATH environment variable
       37 + 
       38 +     -h, --help
       39 +             Print help information
   4   40 | 
   5      - Options:
   6      -   -v, --verbose
   7      -           Enable verbose output
   8      -   -q, --quiet
   9      -           Disable progress output
  10      -   -y
  11      -           Disable confirmation prompt.
  12      -       --default-host <default-host>
  13      -           Choose a default host triple
  14      -       --default-toolchain <default-toolchain>
  15      -           Choose a default toolchain to install. Use 'none' to not install any toolchains at all
  16      -       --profile <profile>
  17      -           [default: default] [possible values: minimal, default, complete]
  18      -   -c, --component <components>...
  19      -           Component name to also install
  20      -   -t, --target <targets>...
  21      -           Target name to also install
  22      -       --no-update-default-toolchain
  23      -           Don't update any existing default toolchain after install
  24      -       --no-modify-path
  25      -           Don't configure the PATH environment variable
  26      -   -h, --help
  27      -           Print help
  28      -   -V, --version
  29      -           Print version
       41 +     -V, --version
       42 +             Print version information

Cargo.lock Show resolved Hide resolved
@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

One other thing, once the tests are passing and we've figured out everything so the output won't churn on you, please also update the bootstrap shell scripts' help to match - we keep them in sync for visual consistency.

src/cli/rustup_mode.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cli/rustup_mode.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

The changes look sane, though I'm no clap expert, so I defer to you on all that!

The only caveat that isn't looking ok is the removal of the rustup version details from the top of the help. Its not necessarily a show stopper, but it does make me nervous, sometimes we have behavioural expectations in the oddest places.

If its easy to re-instate that, that would be great. Otherwise if we can check that the version shows up somewhere in the help, that would be sufficient.

@djc
Copy link
Contributor Author

djc commented Aug 16, 2023

Addressed your suggestions, including adding back the version to the rustup-init help.

@samchouse
Copy link

Hey @djc, I've tried this PR out as you suggested on #3156 and completions are completely broken now on ZSH.

rustup on  clap-4 is 📦 v1.26.0 via 🦀 v1.71.1 
❯ rustup
_rustup:850: parse error near `\n'
_rustup:850: parse error near `\n'
_rustup:850: parse error near `\n'

@djc
Copy link
Contributor Author

djc commented Aug 16, 2023

@Xenfo did you reinstall the completions? I personally don't have any experience with shell completion setup stuff, but all I did here was change a version number for the clap_complete crate.

@samchouse
Copy link

Yes I did, home/bin/rustup completions zsh >> ~/.oh-my-zsh/completions/_rustup.

@samchouse
Copy link

Ignore what I said, looks like it was appending to the completion file. That issue is fixed but the issue from #3156 is still present.

@samchouse
Copy link

It looks like it works after providing 2 main commands.
image

@samchouse
Copy link

samchouse commented Aug 16, 2023

I've tracked the issue down to https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/blob/master/src/cli/rustup_mode.rs#L268-L278. Removing that and https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/blob/master/src/cli/rustup_mode.rs#L147-L149 causes completions to work as expected.

Edit: it's because of the argument before the command, it causes completions not to know if the first command was specified for the toolchain or as an actual command.

assert_eq!(
rustup_init_help_std_out.stdout.unwrap(),
rustup_init_sh_help_std_out.stdout.unwrap()
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have no objection here, but I'm curious why the change

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just trying to reduce the noise from this. We should probably use something like the similar-asserts crate to make the errors from this less inscrutable.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thats a great suggestion. Feel free to add it in incrementally where you need it.

The Rust toolchain installer
stdout = ""
stderr = """
error: error: 'rustup' requires a subcommand but one was not provided
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@rbtcollins any clue why the [..] is not doing the right thing here?

Copy link
Contributor

@rbtcollins rbtcollins Aug 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This behaviour is surprising. rustup -v should print the version and basic help, not an error about subcommand selection.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@djc djc Aug 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch, clap-rs/clap#5076.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with @epage's point in clap-rs/clap#5076 (reply in thread) and I don't even know what rustup -v is supposed to do personally... 👀

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this test had instead used -y or --no-modify-path, would the answer be any different of what this should do?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The metadata output is the result of -v having effect; I suggest changing to -q for the test, which is effectively guaranteed to never be adding more output.

@epage I can appreciate the sentiment about engineering effort / reward. But it seems to me that you take issue with the value judgement not the analysis - you haven't disputed the historical behaviour, argued that the error message is easily understood or proposed alternative ways forward.

So if the question is about the relative merits of option 2 vs option 3, what I can say right now is that rustup is under-resourced in terms of human capacity. And triaging and improving non-functional bugs takes quite a bit of time. We could of course say 'if it isn't a functional problem, we will just ignore/close such bugs'.... but I don't feel that that would be a good way of upholding the excellent work that preceeded my joining the project a few years back.

Perceptions of quality in software often hinge on non-happy-path, non-functional-requirements. We know that at least some people went and tried this path, or we wouldn't have the additional test added to cover it. With it covered, we won't get another bug report about it, which is good.

And @djc seems to have quite rapidly figured out and solved the problem, so thats nice.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@djc djc Aug 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, CI is still failing, which is not so nice.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I take issue with the analysis itself but since it started at the root of the analysis, I didn't go further into it. I didn't just remove SubcommandRequiredElseHelp for code size and binary size.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And for a project that is under resourced, flowing against the stream seems like it'd be the opposite of what you'd want to be doing. I'm not saying this in terms of accepting bugs but of practices

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it depends on where we think our time is going no? We're getting quite meta at this point though.

@djc djc force-pushed the clap-4 branch 4 times, most recently from 92cb005 to 1063602 Compare August 21, 2023 14:50
@@ -26,47 +26,36 @@ RUSTUP_UPDATE_ROOT="${RUSTUP_UPDATE_ROOT:-https://static.rust-lang.org/rustup}"
usage() {
cat <<EOF
rustup-init 1.26.0 (577bf51ae 2023-04-05)
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The only caveat that isn't looking ok is the removal of the rustup version details from the top of the help. Its not necessarily a show stopper, but it does make me nervous, sometimes we have behavioural expectations in the oddest places.

If its easy to re-instate that, that would be great. Otherwise if we can check that the version shows up somewhere in the help, that would be sufficient.

If people are relying on parsing --help output, we will break them; there are no guarentees.

We intentionally dropped this to recover vertical space. If you want precedence / consistency with other rust commands, cargo does not include the version.

Comment on lines 274 to 280
.value_parser(|s: &str| {
use clap::{Error, error::ErrorKind};
if let Some(stripped) = s.strip_prefix('+') {
ResolvableToolchainName::try_from(stripped).map_err(|e| clap::Error::raw(clap::ErrorKind::InvalidValue, e))
ResolvableToolchainName::try_from(stripped).map_err(|e| Error::raw(ErrorKind::InvalidValue, e))
} else {
Err(clap::Error::raw(clap::ErrorKind::InvalidSubcommand, format!("\"{s}\" is not a valid subcommand, so it was interpreted as a toolchain name, but it is also invalid. {TOOLCHAIN_OVERRIDE_ERROR}")))
Err(Error::raw(ErrorKind::InvalidSubcommand, format!("\"{s}\" is not a valid subcommand, so it was interpreted as a toolchain name, but it is also invalid. {TOOLCHAIN_OVERRIDE_ERROR}")))
}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Honestly, I'm surprised this works. The intention was to support any user errors. I'm surprised that clap errors render well when nested. I wouldn't be surprised if we accidentally break this

Copy link
Contributor

@rbtcollins rbtcollins Aug 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do you suggest we do instead?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Use any normal error type that implements Error

Copy link
Contributor

@rbtcollins rbtcollins Aug 25, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, and - just checking for complete clarity - so I don't need to use clap error types in those helpers?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct. If curious, this is the relevant trait implementation you need to match

@epage
Copy link

epage commented Aug 22, 2023

I've tracked the issue down to https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/blob/master/src/cli/rustup_mode.rs#L268-L278. Removing that and https://github.com/rust-lang/rustup/blob/master/src/cli/rustup_mode.rs#L147-L149 causes completions to work as expected.

Edit: it's because of the argument before the command, it causes completions not to know if the first command was specified for the toolchain or as an actual command.

FYI completest now exists for testing of completions. clap has adopted it to test the completion generators. I'd like to adopt it in cargo to test our hand written completions but haven't yet.

Also, clap is (slowly) working towards completions being implemented mostly in Rust which should offer more correctness and flexibility

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

failure windows dev:

---- expected: stderr
++++ actual:   stderr
   1    1 | rustup [..]
   2    2 | 
   3    3 | The Rust toolchain installer
   4    4 | 
  5      - Usage: rustup[EXE] [OPTIONS] [+toolchain] [COMMAND]
   5 + Usage: rustup [OPTIONS] [+toolchain] [COMMAND]
   6    6 | 
   7    7 | Commands:
   8    8 |   show         Show the active and installed toolchains or profiles
   9    9 |   update       Update Rust toolchains and rustup
  10   10 |   check        Check for updates to Rust toolchains and rustup
          ⋮
  47   47 |     for common platforms.
  48   48 | 
  49   49 |     If you are new to Rust consider running `rustup doc --book` to
  50   50 |     learn Rust.
  51   51 | 

mac is a flake.

Linux is

---- expected: stderr
++++ actual:   stderr
   1      - rustup [..]
   2      - 
   ...
  51      - 
        1 + error: could not create home directory: '/.rustup': Permission denied (os error 13)

run Run a command with an environment configured for a given toolchain
which Display which binary will be run for a given command
doc Open the documentation for the current toolchain
Usage: rustup[EXE] [OPTIONS] [+toolchain] [COMMAND]
Copy link
Contributor

@rbtcollins rbtcollins Aug 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure why, but the help for this particular case seems to be skipping .exe on Windows. Try this suggestion?

Suggested change
Usage: rustup[EXE] [OPTIONS] [+toolchain] [COMMAND]
Usage: rustup [OPTIONS] [+toolchain] [COMMAND]

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

rbtcollins commented Aug 22, 2023

At a guess I think the linux error is coming from

rustup/src/config.rs

Lines 198 to 199 in 2fa788a

utils::ensure_dir_exists("home", &rustup_dir, notify_handler.as_ref())?;
- that is from_env() is being called for some reason.

The test suite that runs the trycmd stuff isn't setting up isolated environments (HOME temp dir, environment variables) so this looks like an interaction with the global environment, and could well be super racy.

That said the reason this is triggering that code path isn't too obvious to me. I'll see if get time this weekend to checkout the branch and poke around.

edit: noticed it is '/.rustup' so this is running with HOME=/ I think. Perhaps trycmd does that automatically.

@djc
Copy link
Contributor Author

djc commented Aug 22, 2023

All in all I feel like these trycmd tests are superflaky and hard to work with.

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

All in all I feel like these trycmd tests are superflaky and hard to work with.

They are certainly sensitive to changes, possibly because we've only just added them this year and not had much time to figure out where we want our sensitivity and where not.

I'm not sure that they are flaky: I don't recall a single CI run that failed nondeterministically because of them.

@djc
Copy link
Contributor Author

djc commented Aug 28, 2023

Sure, I guess "overly sensitive" is more accurate than flaky.

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

I've fixed the failure on windows.

On linux I've validated that it is a hermiticity issue leading to the test error. Prepping a separate patch for that.

@rbtcollins
Copy link
Contributor

#3470 should fix the isolation failure. I haven't figured out yet what this patch is doing that introduces the assertion of settings.toml, though probably we should look into that - writing to the settings file when nothing is being explicitly changed is a bit odd.

djc and others added 4 commits August 29, 2023 22:42
@rbtcollins rbtcollins merged commit 3333cdd into rust-lang:master Aug 29, 2023
This was referenced Oct 5, 2023
AJ-Ianozi pushed a commit to AJ-Ianozi/getada-download that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2023
@rami3l rami3l mentioned this pull request Jan 29, 2024
1 task
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.

atty potential unaligned read PowerShell completions installation does not work as documented
5 participants