You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Based on the discussion in #3, it seems that when you declare a distributed_slice within a library it automatically gets prefixed with the crate's name, thus the duplicate check shouldn't be necessary.
It appears however that the inclusion of multiple semvers of the crate can result in duplicate declarations.
Unfortunately, the duplicate check has two unwanted consequences: an extra .linkm2_ section as well as a potential panic!.
I tried adding println!("cargo:rustc-link-arg-bins=/MERGE:.linkme_=.data,.linkm2_=.rdata") to the build.rs script in an attempt to get rid of the section(s), but that didn't seem to have any effect.
It would be helpful to have a feature flag, like no_dupcheck, to conditionally opt-out of the duplicate checks introduced in #53 when creating a release build.
Also, is there any way to prevent multiple semvers from causing duplicate slices in the first place?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Based on the discussion in #3, it seems that when you declare a
distributed_slice
within a library it automatically gets prefixed with the crate's name, thus the duplicate check shouldn't be necessary.It appears however that the inclusion of multiple semvers of the crate can result in duplicate declarations.
Unfortunately, the duplicate check has two unwanted consequences: an extra
.linkm2_
section as well as a potentialpanic!
.I tried adding
println!("cargo:rustc-link-arg-bins=/MERGE:.linkme_=.data,.linkm2_=.rdata")
to thebuild.rs
script in an attempt to get rid of the section(s), but that didn't seem to have any effect.It would be helpful to have a feature flag, like
no_dupcheck
, to conditionally opt-out of the duplicate checks introduced in #53 when creating arelease
build.Also, is there any way to prevent multiple semvers from causing duplicate slices in the first place?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: