Skip to content

Should we AOT the XunitLogChecker tool? #94270

Closed

Description

@ericstj

The XunitLogChecker targets the tool runtime today (an LKG runtime).

We don't deploy this runtime during libraries testing, nor do we really want to take a dependency on deploying that runtime to the test machines. We'll instead let the tool roll-forward and run on the test runtime.

This will work - except for the case that there is such a bad bug that the tool crashes too.

One thing @agocke suggested was that try native-AOT for the tool to make it work without a runtime dependency. This would potentially make the tool less subject to runtime breaks.

Activity

  1. ghost added
    needs-area-labelAn area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
    on Nov 1, 2023
  2. ghost added
    untriagedNew issue has not been triaged by the area owner
    on Nov 1, 2023
  3. added and removed
    needs-area-labelAn area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
    on Nov 1, 2023
  4. carlossanlop commented on Jan 17, 2024

    @carlossanlop
    Contributor

    Closely related to #94722

  5. added this to the 9.0.0 milestone on Jan 17, 2024
  6. ghost removed
    untriagedNew issue has not been triaged by the area owner
    on Jan 17, 2024
  7. modified the milestones: 9.0.0, 10.0.0 on Aug 22, 2024
  8. agocke commented on Sep 11, 2024

    @agocke
    Member

    Fixed by #103795

  9. locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Oct 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Type

No type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions