Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
appveyor: Downgrade MinGW to 6.2.0 - #40865
Merged
Merged
Conversation
It looks like the 6.3.0 MinGW comes with a gdb which has issues (rust-lang#40184) that an attempted workaround (rust-lang#40777) does not actually fix (rust-lang#40835). The original motivation for upgradin MinGW was to fix build flakiness (rust-lang#40546) due to newer builds not exhibiting the same bug, so let's hope that 6.2.0 isn't too far back in time and still contains the fix we need. Closesrust-lang#40835
rust-highfive
commented
Mar 27, 2017
Contributor
r? @aturon (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
arielb1
commented
Mar 27, 2017
Contributor
Let's see if this works. @bors r+ p=10 |
bors
commented
Mar 27, 2017
Collaborator
📌 Commit e87dd42 has been approved by |
bors
commented
Mar 27, 2017
Collaborator
⌛ Testing commit e87dd42 with merge dda4c6b... |
alexcrichton added a commit
to alexcrichton/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2017
…elb1 appveyor: Downgrade MinGW to 6.2.0 It looks like the 6.3.0 MinGW comes with a gdb which has issues (rust-lang#40184) that an attempted workaround (rust-lang#40777) does not actually fix (rust-lang#40835). The original motivation for upgradin MinGW was to fix build flakiness (rust-lang#40546) due to newer builds not exhibiting the same bug, so let's hope that 6.2.0 isn't too far back in time and still contains the fix we need. Closesrust-lang#40835
MemberAuthor
@bors: retry
|
bors added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2017
bors
commented
Mar 28, 2017
Collaborator
⌛ Testing commit e87dd42 with merge c552cf3... |
arielb1
commented
Mar 28, 2017
Contributor
@bors: retry
|
bors
commented
Mar 28, 2017
Collaborator
⌛ Testing commit e87dd42 with merge a446d75... |
bors
commented
Mar 28, 2017
Collaborator
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It looks like the 6.3.0 MinGW comes with a gdb which has issues (#40184) that an
attempted workaround (#40777) does not actually fix (#40835). The original
motivation for upgradin MinGW was to fix build flakiness (#40546) due to newer
builds not exhibiting the same bug, so let's hope that 6.2.0 isn't too far back
in time and still contains the fix we need.
Closes#40835