Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 23, 2023. It is now read-only.

Merge changes from TFS#6018

Closed
dotnet-bot wants to merge 5 commits intodotnet:masterfrom
dotnet-bot:from-tfs
Closed

Merge changes from TFS#6018
dotnet-bot wants to merge 5 commits intodotnet:masterfrom
dotnet-bot:from-tfs

Conversation

@dotnet-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

dotnet-bot and others added 5 commits February 9, 2016 14:20
…S feed, and upgrades project.jsons throughout NDP\FxCore to pass new nuget compatability checks.

Some fixes (adding imports, adding Platforms package) were tooled, but more complex ones (forking project.jsons, editing csproj's) were not.

Also makes dependency version validation rules case-insensitive. (I used this fix to update the versions of some packages.)

[tfs-changeset: 1573868]
…have* the reflection blocking attribute defined.

Update the System.Runtime.Serialization.Primitives assembly to *have* the reflection blocking attribute defined.

This brings back these libraries to parity with how reflection blocking worked in Update 1.

[tfs-changeset: 1573915]
A dependency on System.Buffers was added to FileSystem
around the same time that the project.json was forked.

Add the new dependency to the new project.json.

[tfs-changeset: 1574208]
A netcore50aot configuration was added but missing from project.json.
As a result the nuget resolve build task chose to use the desktop target
and compiler blew up with conflicts between mscorlib and the local types.

Make sure we resolve for netcore50.

[tfs-changeset: 1574210]
The package build was broken because the version of System.Linq
changed to 4.1.0.0.  For platforms that used to support 4.0.0.0 inbox
we need to continue to redist the 4.0.0.0 version.

Additionally, since desktop 4.6 doesn't support the new API we need
to bump up the generation.  For now I am claiming 5.6 which implies
that this surface area must be added to .NET Framework 4.6.

[tfs-changeset: 1574232]
@mellinoe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

LGTM. @ericstj Is this ready to go?

@ellismg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ellismg commented Feb 10, 2016

@dotnet-bot test this please

@mellinoe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I think Jenkins is in the process of being restarted, so this hasn't actually run through CI as far as I know (the latest version at least)

@ericstj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ericstj commented Feb 10, 2016

Yep. This should be good but I want the CI to pass.

@ericstj
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ericstj commented Feb 10, 2016

@mmitche any idea what's going on here? I don't see any failures in the console output for Innerloop Windows_NT Release Build and Test.

@mmitche
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

mmitche commented Feb 10, 2016

See my mail re: disk issues on the server

From: Eric StJohn [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 12:39 PM
To: dotnet/corefx corefx@noreply.github.com
Cc: Matt Mitchell mmitche@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [corefx] Merge changes from TFS (#6018)
Importance: High

@mmitchehttps://github.com/mmitche any idea what's going on here? I don't see any failures in the console output for Innerloop Windows_NT Release Build and Test.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/6018#issuecomment-182573827.

@bartonjs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Since this is already in a merge conflict state, should we go ahead and cancel it and let the next version get reopened? Or do we just want to wait until CI is back online?

@mmitche
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

mmitche commented Feb 11, 2016

@dotnet-bot test this please

@ellismg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ellismg commented Feb 11, 2016

(Closing to pick up internal changes so that @dagood's commit as the correct author. I will then fix the merge conflicts).

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants