Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[release/9.0-staging] Remove unneeded DiagnosticSource content #112708

Merged

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Feb 19, 2025

Backport of #112116 to release/9.0-staging

/cc @tarekgh @noahfalk

Customer Impact

  • Customer reported
  • Found internally

Users who create a NetFX project and reference the System.Diagnostics.DiagnosticSource 9.0 package will encounter a build issue similar to the following:

image

The issue arises because the library package includes ILLink.Descriptors.LibraryBuild.xml, which is unintentionally marked to be copied during the build, even though it is not necessary. This can also cause confusion for other .NET users, as the file ILLink.Descriptors.LibraryBuild.xml is automatically created for C# projects that do not use an SDK-style format, impacting many older codebases. More details can be found in the related issue: #112110

Regression

  • Yes
  • No

This was unintentional change done as part of the PR #106014

Testing

This has been tested with .NET 10 branch and confirmed fixing the reported issue.

Risk

Very low as we are not changing any code more than updating the csproj to not copy the file ILLink.Descriptors.LibraryBuild.xml during the build.

[High/Medium/Low. Justify the indication by mentioning how risks were measured and addressed.]

IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:

  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.

Package authoring no longer needed in .NET 9

IMPORTANT: Starting with .NET 9, you no longer need to edit a NuGet package's csproj to enable building and bump the version.
Keep in mind that we still need package authoring in .NET 8 and older versions.

The IL link file was getting included as unnecessary content in transitive dependent projects which caused confusion.

Fixes #112110
Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tarekgh, @tommcdon, @pjanotti
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

@tarekgh tarekgh added this to the 9.0.x milestone Feb 19, 2025
@tarekgh tarekgh requested a review from noahfalk February 19, 2025 20:18
@tarekgh tarekgh self-assigned this Feb 19, 2025
@tarekgh tarekgh added the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Feb 19, 2025
@tarekgh
Copy link
Member

tarekgh commented Feb 19, 2025

CC @tommcdon @ericstj @artl93 @jkotas

Copy link
Member

@noahfalk noahfalk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@tarekgh - the issue notes say that testing confirmed this worked. I didn't test it before making the .NET 10 fix so just want to make sure there was no confusion there. If you tested it then all is well :)

@tarekgh
Copy link
Member

tarekgh commented Feb 20, 2025

the issue notes say that testing confirmed this worked. I didn't test it before making the .NET 10 fix so just want to make sure there was no confusion there. If you tested it then all is well :)

Yes, I confirmed the .NET 10 package does not contain the file ILLink.Descriptors.LibraryBuild.xml anymore (not even has the contentFiles folder). While .NET 9.0 Package has it:

image

image

@rbhanda rbhanda modified the milestones: 9.0.x, 9.0.4 Feb 20, 2025
@rbhanda rbhanda added Servicing-approved Approved for servicing release and removed Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review labels Feb 20, 2025
@tarekgh tarekgh merged commit 98c77e4 into release/9.0-staging Feb 20, 2025
90 of 94 checks passed
@jkotas jkotas deleted the backport/pr-112116-to-release/9.0-staging branch February 21, 2025 03:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants