Skip to content

Replace CI's Windows cargo check with a Linux-hosted Windows Bazel check #4324

Open

Description

@ScriptedAlchemy

Bazel is the only build authority, but .github/workflows/ci.yml still runs a Windows cargo check to type-check cfg(windows) code. #4323 (Fixes #4206) kept it as a documented exception: windows-test is dispatch-only and the workspace registers no Windows target toolchain for Linux hosts, so removing the step would drop the only automatic cfg(windows) coverage.

Acceptance:

  • Register a Windows target toolchain usable from the Linux CI runners (or a hosted Windows Bazel job that runs on every PR).
  • A Bazel target type-checks the workspace's cfg(windows) code on every PR.
  • Delete the cargo step from ci.yml in the same change.
  • Show the new check failing on a deliberate cfg(windows) type error.

Activity

  1. ScriptedAlchemy commented on Oct 19, 2026

    @ScriptedAlchemy
    OwnerAuthor

    Implement this remaining build-authority gap for the owner's full-backlog request. Read current CI, toolchain registrations and #4323/#4266 first. Replace the automatic Windows Cargo check only when an equivalent automatic Bazel cfg(windows) check is present in the same change; retain actual Windows coverage rather than merely deleting the exception. Prefer the smallest supported Linux-hosted Windows target/toolchain path; otherwise use the existing hosted Windows Bazel machinery without a new redundant full-release matrix. Demonstrate the exact automatic check failing on a deliberate cfg(windows) type error and passing repaired code. Keep current Rust/dependency patches, provenance and shipping artifact authority aligned; coordinate #4346 nightly update and #4339 manifest cleanup. Existing tests/format/Clippy policies remain, commit headers <=72, no fake green, disabled checks, arbitrary longer budgets or second build system. Deliver reviewable implementation plus exact executed validation.

  2. linked a pull request that will close this issueReplace Windows Cargo check with Bazel CI #4358on Oct 19, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

No labels
No labels

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions