build-std: always by davidtwco · Pull Request #3874 · rust-lang/rfcs

added 2 commits

October 31, 2025 11:52

This was referenced

Oct 31, 2025

@davidtwco

This was referenced

Oct 31, 2025

@davidtwco davidtwco added T-libs-api

Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the RFC.

T-compiler

Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the RFC.

T-cargo

Relevant to the Cargo team, which will review and decide on the RFC.

labels

Oct 31, 2025

@ojeda ojeda mentioned this pull request

Oct 31, 2025

48 tasks

clarfonthey

clarfonthey

clarfonthey

clarfonthey

clarfonthey

clarfonthey

epage

epage

tgross35

programmerjake

@davidtwco

@davidtwco

epage

epage

epage

JonathanBrouwer added a commit to JonathanBrouwer/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 12, 2026
…vooeo

Destabilise `target-spec-json`

Per rust-lang/compiler-team#944:

> Per rust-lang#71009, the ability to load target spec JSONs was stabilised accidentally. Within the team, we've always considered the format to be unstable and have changed it freely. This has been feasible as custom targets can only be used with core, like any other target, and so custom targets de-facto require nightly to be used (i.e. to build core manually or use Cargo's -Zbuild-std).
>
> Current build-std RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#3873, rust-lang/rfcs#3874) propose a mechanism for building core on stable (at the request of Rust for Linux), which combined with a stable target-spec-json format, permit the current format to be used much more widely on stable toolchains. This would prevent us from improving the format - making it less tied to LLVM, switching to TOML, enabling keys in the spec to be stabilised individually, etc.
>
> De-stabilising the format gives us the opportunity to improve the format before it is too challenging to do so. Internal company toolchains and projects like Rust for Linux already use target-spec-json, but must use nightly at some point while doing so, so while it could be inconvenient for those users to destabilise this, it is hoped that an minimal alternative that we could choose to stabilise can be proposed relatively quickly.

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 12, 2026
…vooeo

Destabilise `target-spec-json`

Per rust-lang/compiler-team#944:

> Per rust-lang#71009, the ability to load target spec JSONs was stabilised accidentally. Within the team, we've always considered the format to be unstable and have changed it freely. This has been feasible as custom targets can only be used with core, like any other target, and so custom targets de-facto require nightly to be used (i.e. to build core manually or use Cargo's -Zbuild-std).
>
> Current build-std RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#3873, rust-lang/rfcs#3874) propose a mechanism for building core on stable (at the request of Rust for Linux), which combined with a stable target-spec-json format, permit the current format to be used much more widely on stable toolchains. This would prevent us from improving the format - making it less tied to LLVM, switching to TOML, enabling keys in the spec to be stabilised individually, etc.
>
> De-stabilising the format gives us the opportunity to improve the format before it is too challenging to do so. Internal company toolchains and projects like Rust for Linux already use target-spec-json, but must use nightly at some point while doing so, so while it could be inconvenient for those users to destabilise this, it is hoped that an minimal alternative that we could choose to stabilise can be proposed relatively quickly.

JonathanBrouwer added a commit to JonathanBrouwer/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 13, 2026
…vooeo

Destabilise `target-spec-json`

Per rust-lang/compiler-team#944:

> Per rust-lang#71009, the ability to load target spec JSONs was stabilised accidentally. Within the team, we've always considered the format to be unstable and have changed it freely. This has been feasible as custom targets can only be used with core, like any other target, and so custom targets de-facto require nightly to be used (i.e. to build core manually or use Cargo's -Zbuild-std).
>
> Current build-std RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#3873, rust-lang/rfcs#3874) propose a mechanism for building core on stable (at the request of Rust for Linux), which combined with a stable target-spec-json format, permit the current format to be used much more widely on stable toolchains. This would prevent us from improving the format - making it less tied to LLVM, switching to TOML, enabling keys in the spec to be stabilised individually, etc.
>
> De-stabilising the format gives us the opportunity to improve the format before it is too challenging to do so. Internal company toolchains and projects like Rust for Linux already use target-spec-json, but must use nightly at some point while doing so, so while it could be inconvenient for those users to destabilise this, it is hoped that an minimal alternative that we could choose to stabilise can be proposed relatively quickly.

rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 13, 2026
Rollup merge of #150151 - destabilise-target-spec-json, r=Kivooeo

Destabilise `target-spec-json`

Per rust-lang/compiler-team#944:

> Per #71009, the ability to load target spec JSONs was stabilised accidentally. Within the team, we've always considered the format to be unstable and have changed it freely. This has been feasible as custom targets can only be used with core, like any other target, and so custom targets de-facto require nightly to be used (i.e. to build core manually or use Cargo's -Zbuild-std).
>
> Current build-std RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#3873, rust-lang/rfcs#3874) propose a mechanism for building core on stable (at the request of Rust for Linux), which combined with a stable target-spec-json format, permit the current format to be used much more widely on stable toolchains. This would prevent us from improving the format - making it less tied to LLVM, switching to TOML, enabling keys in the spec to be stabilised individually, etc.
>
> De-stabilising the format gives us the opportunity to improve the format before it is too challenging to do so. Internal company toolchains and projects like Rust for Linux already use target-spec-json, but must use nightly at some point while doing so, so while it could be inconvenient for those users to destabilise this, it is hoped that an minimal alternative that we could choose to stabilise can be proposed relatively quickly.

github-actions bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide that referenced this pull request

Jan 20, 2026
Destabilise `target-spec-json`

Per rust-lang/compiler-team#944:

> Per rust-lang/rust#71009, the ability to load target spec JSONs was stabilised accidentally. Within the team, we've always considered the format to be unstable and have changed it freely. This has been feasible as custom targets can only be used with core, like any other target, and so custom targets de-facto require nightly to be used (i.e. to build core manually or use Cargo's -Zbuild-std).
>
> Current build-std RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#3873, rust-lang/rfcs#3874) propose a mechanism for building core on stable (at the request of Rust for Linux), which combined with a stable target-spec-json format, permit the current format to be used much more widely on stable toolchains. This would prevent us from improving the format - making it less tied to LLVM, switching to TOML, enabling keys in the spec to be stabilised individually, etc.
>
> De-stabilising the format gives us the opportunity to improve the format before it is too challenging to do so. Internal company toolchains and projects like Rust for Linux already use target-spec-json, but must use nightly at some point while doing so, so while it could be inconvenient for those users to destabilise this, it is hoped that an minimal alternative that we could choose to stabilise can be proposed relatively quickly.

rust-bors bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 21, 2026
…, r=Kobzol

Move bootstrap configuration to library workspace

This creates a new "dist" profile in the standard library which contains configuration for the distributed std artifacts previously contained in bootstrap, in order for a future build-std implementation to use. bootstrap.toml settings continue to override these defaults, as would any RUSTFLAGS provided. I've left some cargo features driven by bootstrap for a future patch.

Unfortunately, profiles aren't expressive enough to express per-target overrides, so [this risc-v example](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c8f22ca269a1f2653ac962fe2bc21105065fd6cd/src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/compile.rs#L692) was not able to be moved across. This could go in its own profile which Cargo would have to know to use, and then the panic-abort rustflags overrides would need duplicating again. Doesn't seem like a sustainable solution as a couple similar overrides would explode the number of lines here.

We could use a cargo config in the library workspace for this, but this then would have to be respected by Cargo's build-std implementation and I'm not yet sure about the tradeoffs there.

This patch also introduces a build probe to deal with the test crate's stability which is obviously not ideal, I'm open to other solutions here or can back that change out for now if anyone prefers.

cc @Mark-Simulacrum rust-lang/rfcs#3874

@ehuss ehuss mentioned this pull request

Jan 23, 2026

github-actions bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/miri that referenced this pull request

Jan 23, 2026
…, r=Kobzol

Move bootstrap configuration to library workspace

This creates a new "dist" profile in the standard library which contains configuration for the distributed std artifacts previously contained in bootstrap, in order for a future build-std implementation to use. bootstrap.toml settings continue to override these defaults, as would any RUSTFLAGS provided. I've left some cargo features driven by bootstrap for a future patch.

Unfortunately, profiles aren't expressive enough to express per-target overrides, so [this risc-v example](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c8f22ca269a1f2653ac962fe2bc21105065fd6cd/src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/compile.rs#L692) was not able to be moved across. This could go in its own profile which Cargo would have to know to use, and then the panic-abort rustflags overrides would need duplicating again. Doesn't seem like a sustainable solution as a couple similar overrides would explode the number of lines here.

We could use a cargo config in the library workspace for this, but this then would have to be respected by Cargo's build-std implementation and I'm not yet sure about the tradeoffs there.

This patch also introduces a build probe to deal with the test crate's stability which is obviously not ideal, I'm open to other solutions here or can back that change out for now if anyone prefers.

cc @Mark-Simulacrum rust-lang/rfcs#3874

github-actions bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide that referenced this pull request

Jan 26, 2026
…, r=Kobzol

Move bootstrap configuration to library workspace

This creates a new "dist" profile in the standard library which contains configuration for the distributed std artifacts previously contained in bootstrap, in order for a future build-std implementation to use. bootstrap.toml settings continue to override these defaults, as would any RUSTFLAGS provided. I've left some cargo features driven by bootstrap for a future patch.

Unfortunately, profiles aren't expressive enough to express per-target overrides, so [this risc-v example](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c8f22ca269a1f2653ac962fe2bc21105065fd6cd/src/bootstrap/src/core/build_steps/compile.rs#L692) was not able to be moved across. This could go in its own profile which Cargo would have to know to use, and then the panic-abort rustflags overrides would need duplicating again. Doesn't seem like a sustainable solution as a couple similar overrides would explode the number of lines here.

We could use a cargo config in the library workspace for this, but this then would have to be respected by Cargo's build-std implementation and I'm not yet sure about the tradeoffs there.

This patch also introduces a build probe to deal with the test crate's stability which is obviously not ideal, I'm open to other solutions here or can back that change out for now if anyone prefers.

cc @Mark-Simulacrum rust-lang/rfcs#3874

adamgemmell

@davidtwco

@davidtwco