Manually limit bytemuck_derive to ">=1.8.1, <1.9.0" #3609
Manually limit bytemuck_derive to ">=1.8.1, <1.9.0" #3609cryptopapi997 wants to merge 2 commits into
bytemuck_derive to ">=1.8.1, <1.9.0" #3609Conversation
|
@cryptopapi997 is attempting to deploy a commit to the coral-xyz Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
|
Yeah, the PR has been thoroughly rejected. Silly, to make your package break for no gain at all. |
acheroncrypto
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for making this PR. However, this would basically only fix the anchor init issues, and the people who just add the anchor-lang crate, or the people who're upgrading from an older version would still run into this issue. That's why it's much better to fix this directly from lang instead of CLI (#3610).
Ideally we'd want to resolve this upstream, for which @Tritlo took the initiative with his PR here, however judging by the maintainer's comments in the issue thread, this one is unlikely to be merged.
I think we'll be able to avoid these issues altogether once build-sbf uses Rust >=1.84: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2025/01/09/Rust-1.84.0.html#cargo-considers-rust-versions-for-dependency-version-selectio
bytemuck_derivereleased a new minor version which requires the rust tooling to use 1.84, which uses the 2024 edition.cargo-sbfis still on 1.79, so it cannot use this. Normally, cargo should only select packages that match it's rust version, but in this case it clearly does not, resulting in any new anchor project being broken. More info in #3606.Ideally we'd want to resolve this upstream, for which @Tritlo took the initiative with his PR here, however judging by the maintainer's comments in the issue thread, this one is unlikely to be merged.
Opening this PR pre-emptively, but I propose waiting on the upstream PR to be finished (either via merge or close) to then decide on closing or merging this PR.