This PR tweaks the change made in #5904 so that the `profiling` Cargo
profile does _not_ have LTO enabled. With LTO enabled, compile times
even after just doing a `touch crates/uv/src/bin/uv.rs` are devastating:
$ cargo b --profile profiling -p uv
Compiling uv-cli v0.0.1 (/home/andrew/astral/uv/crates/uv-cli)
Compiling uv v0.2.34 (/home/andrew/astral/uv/crates/uv)
Finished `profiling` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 3m 47s
Even with `lto = "thin"`, compile times are not great, but an
improvement:
$ cargo b --profile profiling -p uv
Compiling uv v0.2.34 (/home/andrew/astral/uv/crates/uv)
Finished `profiling` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 53.98s
But our original configuration for `profiling`, prior to #5904, was with
LTO completely disabled:
$ cargo b --profile profiling -p uv
Compiling uv v0.2.34 (/home/andrew/astral/uv/crates/uv)
Finished `profiling` profile [optimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 30.09s
This gives reasonable-ish compile times, although I still want them to
be better.
This setup does risk that we are measuring something in benchmarks that
we are shipping, but in order to make those two the same, we'd either
need to make compile times way worse for development, or take a hit
to binary size and a slight hit to runtime performance in our release
builds. I would weakly prefer that we accept the hit to runtime
performance and binary size in order to bring our measurements in line
with what we ship, but I _strongly_ feel that we should not have compile
times exceeding minutes for development. When doing performance testing,
long compile times, for me anyway, break "flow" state.
A confounding factor here was that #5904 enabled LTO for the `release`
profile, but the `dist` profile (used by `cargo dist`) was still setting
it to `lto = "thin"`. However, because of shenanigans in our release
pipeline, we we actually using the `release` profile for binaries we
ship. This PR does not make any changes here other than to remove `lto =
"thin"` from the `dist` profile to make the fact that they are the same
a bit clearer.
cc @davfsa
## Summary
This PR adds a `DistExtension` field to some of our distribution types,
which requires that we validate that the file type is known and
supported when parsing (rather than when attempting to unzip). It
removes a bunch of extension parsing from the code too, in favor of
doing it once upfront.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/5858.
## Summary
I think this seems reasonable... Otherwise, we might not go back to PyPI
to revalidate the list of available versions despite the user passing
`--upgrade`.
## Summary
Previously, we wouldn't respect configuration files in directories
_above_ a workspace root. But this is somewhat problematic, because any
`pyproject.toml` will define a workspace root...
Instead, I think we should _start_ the search at the workspace root, but
go above it if necessary.
Closes: #5929.
See: https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/pull/4295.
## Summary
Resolves#5188. Most of the changes involve creating a new function in
`tool/common.rs` to contain the common functionality previously found in
`tool/install.rs`.
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
```console
❯ ./target/debug/uv tool upgrade black
warning: `uv tool upgrade` is experimental and may change without warning.
Resolved 6 packages in 25ms
Uninstalled 1 package in 3ms
Installed 1 package in 19ms
- black==23.1.0
+ black==24.4.2
Installed 2 executables: black, blackd
```
e.g.
```
❯ cargo run -- venv --no-system
Blocking waiting for file lock on build directory
Compiling uv v0.2.34 (/Users/zb/workspace/uv/crates/uv)
Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 19.85s
Running `target/debug/uv venv --no-system`
warning: The `--no-system` flag has no effect, a system Python interpreter is always used in `uv venv`
Using Python 3.12.4 interpreter at: /opt/homebrew/opt/python@3.12/bin/python3.12
Creating virtualenv at: .venv
Activate with: source .venv/bin/activate
❯ cargo run -- venv --system
Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.15s
Running `target/debug/uv venv --system`
warning: The `--system` flag has no effect, a system Python interpreter is always used in `uv venv`
Using Python 3.12.4 interpreter at: /opt/homebrew/opt/python@3.12/bin/python3.12
Creating virtualenv at: .venv
Activate with: source .venv/bin/activate
```
## Summary
This _used_ to be true but we now require fetching metadata for all
distributions even with `--no-deps` since, e.g., we validate that any
declared extras exist.
## Summary
Initially, we showed _all_ resolver and installer output in `uv run` and
`uv tool run`, since it was way too much for workhorse commands. Then,
we moved to showing _no_ output by default, which was way too little --
you had no idea why anything was happening, and commands appeared to
hang.
This PR adds a more nuanced middle-ground. With `--verbose`, we continue
to show everything. But by default, in `uv run` and `uv tool run`...
- During resolution, we show any "Building" and "Build" messages, if you
need to build a source distribution. But we don't show any other output.
(This _could_ be too little for expensive resolutions; we may want to
show a spinner.)
- If there are no changes to be made after resolving, we don't show any
other output.
- If we have to install, we show the progress bars for downloads (which
disappear on completion) followed by a single summary line stating the
number of packages installed.
This feels pretty good, in my limited testing. When everything is built
/ cached, you don't get _any_ additional output. When there's work to
do, you have a sense for what's happening, and we leave you with a
single summary line ("Installed X packages") at the end.
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/5758.
## Test Plan
Notice that the first `tool run` ends with an install line; the second
shows no additional output:
If you run `uv run` in a package for the first time, we _do_ tell you
that we're building / built it:
But on the second run, there's no output:
If you add a `--with`, we'll show you all the installer progress bars
(which disappear once they're done), and then a single summary line:
Currently, the entry for a package+version+source table is called
`distribution`. That is incorrect, the `sdist` and `wheel` fields inside
of that table are distributions, the table itself is for a package. We
also align ourselves closer with PEP 751.
I went through `lock.rs` and renamed all occurrences of "distribution"
that actually referred to a "package".
This change invalidates all existing lockfiles.
Bikeshedding: Do we call it `package` or `packages`? See also
https://github.com/python/peps/pull/3877
`package` is nice because it looks like a header:
```toml
[[package]]
name = "anyio"
version = "4.3.0"
source = { registry = "https://pypi.org/simple" }
dependencies = [
{ name = "idna" },
{ name = "sniffio" },
]
sdist = { url = "3970183622/anyio-4.3.0.tar.gz", hash = "sha256:f75253795a87df48568485fd18cdd2a3fa5c4f7c5be8e5e36637733fce06fed6", size = 159642 }
wheels = [
{ url = "2f20c40b45/anyio-4.3.0-py3-none-any.whl", hash = "sha256:048e05d0f6caeed70d731f3db756d35dcc1f35747c8c403364a8332c630441b8", size = 85584 },
]
```
`packages` is nice because the field is not a single entry, but a list.
2/3 for https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/4893
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
## Summary
In the same spirit as #5745, release builds could be a bit slightly more
size efficient by enabling LTO, which removes dead code (either in uv
through fully inlined functions or the libraries it depends on). Also
has the side-effect (more what LTO was created for) of slighly speeding
up uv.
In this case, I have measured a 5MB size decrease!.
Unfortunately, this change also comes with the disadvantage of more than
doubling the build time of a clean build on my machine (see "Test
Plan"). I have opened this pull request to show my findings and suggest
this as an option.
*I have also started looking into what effects optimizing for size
rather than speed could have, but that calls for another pr*
## Test Plan
Comparing the binary size before and after (starting off in just a
simple clone of the repository)
System info:
```
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (16) @ 3.600GHz
Memory: 32GB @ 3200 MT/s
Uname: Linux galaxy 6.6.44-1-MANJARO #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Sat Aug 3 10:09:33 UTC 2024 x86_64 GNU/Linux
```
Before:
```
$ cargo build --release
<snip>
Finished `release` profile [optimized] target(s) in 1m 29s
$ du target/release/uv -h
30M target/release/uv
```
After:
```
$ cargo build --release
<snip>
Finished `release` profile [optimized] target(s) in 3m 43s
$ du target/release/uv -h
25M target/release/uv
```
## Summary
Whenever we call `resolve`, we immediately call `fetch` after. And in
some cases `resolve` actually calls `fetch` internally. It seems a lot
simpler to just merge these into one method that returns a `Fetch`
(which itself contains the fully-resolved URL).
Closes https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/5876.
There are three options that determine resolver behavior:
* resolution mode
* prerelease mode
* exclude newer
They are different from the other top level options: If they mismatch,
we recreate the resolution. To distinguish them from the rest of the
lockfile, we group them under an `[options]` header.
1/3 for #4893
From 8 to 16 cores, 32 to 64 GB ram. Testing on Windows first because
it's the bottleneck.
Previously tested in #2515 to no effect, maybe better now that we have a
development drive?
Following #5869, the documentation has some less-than-helpful
suggestions to use `uv help python` for details — we should link to the
`uv python` section instead.
