Keith Smiley
Keith Smiley
The problem is the rule based toolchain depends on the legacy features from bazel, and those features don't have all the actions i need in them, for example this feature...
no all_requirements usage on our side
i submitted https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/pull/24670
I think that one is complaining about either `BAZEL_CC_COVERAGE_TOOL` or `GCOV`, maybe setting one of those will sidestep?
I'm not sure i would say it was ever "supported", but you aren't the only people using it so i think we should fix it
Here's a failing test case demonstrating this issue: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/pull/23203 If i remove all exec_groups from cc_test it passes, which is what I expected behavior wise, that the passed exec_compatible_with /...
Seems like doing that toolchain setup would potentially work, given the lack of docs and public usages I was a bit wary when I saw that might be an option....
FWIW I tried implementing a `@bazel_tools//tools/cpp:test_runner_toolchain_type` and it seems to suffer from the same issue that it can't affect only the test action's exec platform. You can influence the entire...
[repro.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/18496045/repro.zip) here's my example, you'll have to mess with remote exec settings a bit. AFAICT even though the toolchain is correctly selected: ``` INFO: ToolchainResolution: Performing resolution of @@bazel_tools//tools/cpp:test_runner_toolchain_type for...
@ head using `exec_group_compatible_with = {"test": [whatever]}` solves this case, thanks @fmeum !