-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 285
Bazel 8.0.0 compatibility #1652
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
Comments
I noted in #1625, based on copious notes from cd22d88 (under But, the good news is, Bzlmod builds aren't affected by that particular problem, and Bzlmodification is in the home stretch. Once that lands, we can bump up the FWIW, I've been using rules_java 7.11.1 in my |
Ah. We have a continuation of the protobuf + ScalaPB saga from #1647. If I bump to rules_java 8.5.1 (and rules_cc 0.1.0), and stick with protobuf 21.7 (the current rules_scala version, via single_version_override) or protobuf 24.4 (the latest Bazel Central Registry protobuf module compatible with ScalaPB 0.11.17), I get: $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/...
ERROR: Skipping '//src/...': error loading package under directory 'src':
error loading package 'src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/io_utils':
at .../external/rules_java~/java/defs.bzl:16:6:
Label '@@protobuf~//bazel:java_lite_proto_library.bzl' is invalid because
'bazel' is not a package; perhaps you meant to put the colon here:
'@@protobuf~//:bazel/java_lite_proto_library.bzl'?
ERROR: error loading package under directory 'src':
error loading package 'src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/io_utils':
at .../external/rules_java~/java/defs.bzl:16:6:
Label '@@protobuf~//bazel:java_lite_proto_library.bzl' is invalid because
'bazel' is not a package; perhaps you meant to put the colon here:
'@@protobuf~//:bazel/java_lite_proto_library.bzl'? The However, bumping ScalaPB to 1.0.0-alpha.1 and Protobuf v28.3 did work. But as noted in #1647, committing the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump would mean effectively forcing rules_scala users to upgrade to at least Protobuf v28.2 immediately. Maybe that's what we ought to do anyway, because clearly we don't want to block anyone from upgrading to Bazel 8. But we'd have to shout it from the rooftops—at the same time we try to persuade folks to switch from depending on Even so, rules_cc 0.0.9 and rules_java 7.9.0 still work with Protobuf v28.3 and ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1. That means we wouldn't leave Bazel 6 or 7 |
Ah, more info. The results from my last comment were from building with Bazel 7.4.1. Building with 8.0.0rc4 is not yet possible. First, I had to update to the highest versions of all dependencies in the Bazel module graph: bazel_dep(name = "rules_cc", version = "0.1.0")
bazel_dep(name = "rules_java", version = "8.5.1")
bazel_dep(name = "rules_proto", version = "7.0.2")
bazel_dep(name = "protobuf", version = "29.0-rc3", repo_name = "com_google_protobuf")
bazel_dep(name = "rules_python", version = "0.40.0", dev_dependency = True) I also bumped the following in PROTOBUF_JAVA_VERSION = "4.29.0-RC3" I had to add one, the other, or both of these lines to the load("@rules_java//java/common:java_common.bzl", "java_common")
load("@rules_java//java/common:java_info.bzl", "JavaInfo") But sadly, ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 and protobuf-java:4.29.0-RC3 aren't compatible: $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/...
ERROR: .../test/proto/BUILD:184:14:
ProtoScalaPBRule test/proto/nested_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar
failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed:
error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command
(from target //test/proto:nested_proto)
bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ...
(remaining 2 arguments skipped)
--jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
at scalapb.options.compiler.Scalapb$.registerAllExtensions(Scalapb.scala:8)
at scalarules.test.extra_protobuf_generator.ExtraProtobufGenerator$.run(ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala:53)
at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.$anonfun$runWithBytes$1(PluginFrontend.scala:51)
at scala.util.Try$.apply(Try.scala:217)
at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithBytes(PluginFrontend.scala:51)
at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithInputStream(PluginFrontend.scala:121)
at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$2(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:40)
at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18)
at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1$$anon$2.block(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:60)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.managedBlock(ForkJoinPool.java:3118)
at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1.blockOn(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:71)
at scala.concurrent.package$.blocking(package.scala:124)
at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$1(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:38)
at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18)
at scala.concurrent.Future$.$anonfun$apply$1(Future.scala:687)
at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise$Transformation.run(Promise.scala:467)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1426)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:290)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1020)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1656)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1594)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:183)
Caused by: com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion$ProtobufRuntimeVersionException:
Detected mismatched Protobuf Gencode/Runtime version suffixes when loading
scalapb.options.Scalapb: gencode 4.28.2, runtime 4.29.0-rc3.
Version suffixes must be the same.
at com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion.validateProtobufGencodeVersionImpl(RuntimeVersion.java:126)
at com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion.validateProtobufGencodeVersion(RuntimeVersion.java:71)
at scalapb.options.Scalapb.<clinit>(Scalapb.java:11)
... 22 more
java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1
at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:27)
at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44)
at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96)
at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49)
at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39)
at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala)
ERROR: .../test/proto/BUILD:184:14
Building source jar test/proto/nested_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed:
(Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed:
error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command
(from target //test/proto:nested_proto)
bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ...
(remaining 2 arguments skipped) Pinning Protobuf to v28.3 using $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/...
ERROR: Skipping '//scala_proto/...':
error loading package under directory 'scala_proto':
error loading package 'scala_proto/private':
Internal error while loading Starlark builtins:
Failed to autoload external symbols:
cannot load '@@protobuf+//bazel/private:bazel_cc_proto_library.bzl':
no such file
ERROR: error loading package under directory 'scala_proto':
error loading package 'scala_proto/private':
Internal error while loading Starlark builtins:
Failed to autoload external symbols:
cannot load '@@protobuf+//bazel/private:bazel_cc_proto_library.bzl':
no such file
These aren't insurmountable issues; perhaps once Protobuf v29.0 lands, I can try again, and ScalaPB v1.0.0-alpha.1 will be happy with plain protobuf-java:4.29.0. Building with Bazel 8 will be blocked until then, even after Bzlmodification. However, building with Bazel 8 will require those new |
I spoke too soon: I can get a So it seems we could bump to Bazel 8 without abandoning Update: To confirm, I went back to Bazel 7.4.1 to build using the new $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/...
ERROR: Traceback (most recent call last):
File ".../external/remote_java_tools/BUILD", line 7, column 60, in <toplevel>
load("@rules_cc//cc:defs.bzl", "cc_binary", "cc_library", "cc_proto_library")
Error: file '@rules_cc//cc:defs.bzl' does not contain symbol 'cc_proto_library'
ERROR: .../external/remote_java_tools/BUILD:
no such target '@@remote_java_tools//:TurbineDirect':
target 'TurbineDirect' not declared in package ''
defined by .../external/remote_java_tools/BUILD
ERROR: .../test/toolchains/BUILD.bazel:10:23:
no such target '@@remote_java_tools//:TurbineDirect':
target 'TurbineDirect' not declared in package ''
defined by .../external/remote_java_tools/BUILD
and referenced by '//test/toolchains:java21_toolchain'
ERROR: Analysis of target '//test/toolchains:java21_toolchain' failed;
build aborted: Analysis failed |
These changes enable both `WORKSPACE` and Bzlmod builds to reach a point where both fail with the following errors. Part of bazelbuild#1652. - To use `WORKSPACE`, specify `--enable_workspace --noenable_bzlmod` on the command line or add them to `.bazelrc`. Per that issue, the following breakages may be resolved by a new `protobuf-java:4.29.0` release (without the `-RC3` suffix. Then we can try to run the rest of the `rules_scala` test suite. Also per that issue, adopting Bazel 8 and rules_java 8 compatibility will necessarily break Bazel 6 and 7 compatibility. --- Hoisted the `load_rules_dependencies()` macro into the new `//scala:deps.bzl` file to avoid copying everything into `WORKSPACE`. Changed the order of `http_archive()` calls as well. Without importing these repos in this order, the build would break under `WORKSPACE`. Without the `rules_java_dependencies()` and `protobuf_deps()` calls where they are, the build also breaks. --- Under both `WORKSPACE` and Bzlmod, the following build command will fail with a `mismatched Protobuf Gencode/Runtime version suffixes` error: ```txt $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/... ERROR: .../external/protobuf+/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:130:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/protobuf+/src/google/protobuf/wrappers_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@protobuf+//src/google/protobuf:wrappers_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError at scalapb.options.compiler.Scalapb$.registerAllExtensions(Scalapb.scala:8) at scalarules.test.extra_protobuf_generator.ExtraProtobufGenerator$.run(ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala:53) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.$anonfun$runWithBytes$1(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at scala.util.Try$.apply(Try.scala:217) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithBytes(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithInputStream(PluginFrontend.scala:121) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$2(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:40) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1$$anon$2.block(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:60) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.managedBlock(ForkJoinPool.java:3118) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1.blockOn(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:71) at scala.concurrent.package$.blocking(package.scala:124) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$1(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:38) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18) at scala.concurrent.Future$.$anonfun$apply$1(Future.scala:687) at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise$Transformation.run(Promise.scala:467) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1426) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:290) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1020) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1656) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1594) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:183) Caused by: com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion$ProtobufRuntimeVersionException: Detected mismatched Protobuf Gencode/Runtime version suffixes when loading scalapb.options.Scalapb: gencode 4.28.2, runtime 4.29.0-rc3. Version suffixes must be the same. at com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion.validateProtobufGencodeVersionImpl(RuntimeVersion.java:126) at com.google.protobuf.RuntimeVersion.validateProtobufGencodeVersion(RuntimeVersion.java:71) at scalapb.options.Scalapb.<clinit>(Scalapb.java:11) ... 22 more java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:27) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/protobuf+/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:130:14 scala @@protobuf+//src/google/protobuf:wrappers_proto failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@protobuf+//src/google/protobuf:wrappers_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ``` Later builds then fail with `java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class scalapb.options.Scalapb`: ```txt $ bazel build //src/... //test/... //third_party/... //scala_proto/... ERROR: .../third_party/test/proto/BUILD.bazel:4:14: ProtoScalaPBRule third_party/test/proto/proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target //third_party/test/proto:proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class scalapb.options.Scalapb at scalapb.options.compiler.Scalapb$.registerAllExtensions(Scalapb.scala:8) at scalarules.test.extra_protobuf_generator.ExtraProtobufGenerator$.run(ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala:53) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.$anonfun$runWithBytes$1(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at scala.util.Try$.apply(Try.scala:217) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithBytes(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithInputStream(PluginFrontend.scala:121) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$2(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:40) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1$$anon$2.block(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:60) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.managedBlock(ForkJoinPool.java:3118) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1.blockOn(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:71) at scala.concurrent.package$.blocking(package.scala:124) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$1(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:38) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.scala:18) at scala.concurrent.Future$.$anonfun$apply$1(Future.scala:687) at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise$Transformation.run(Promise.scala:467) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1426) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:290) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1020) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1656) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1594) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:183) java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:27) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../third_party/test/proto/BUILD.bazel:4:14 Building source jar third_party/test/proto/proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target //third_party/test/proto:proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
I've created the Note that this branch/commit is based on my |
I believe the original issue in the description (#1652 (comment)) is because the Historically, this has only worked by accident, as the Starlark environment for The right fix would to partition the rules_scala bzl load graph into non-overlapping (cc @comius, @meteorcloudy) |
I think it's better to do the right thing here instead of implementing more hacks that would be remove anyway in future. |
As it turns out, this can't actually work (at least not easily), as
This seems doable and I might end up doing this for Bazel@HEAD, if only to turn our downstream CI green. However, (if it does happen) cherry-picking the fix to Bazel 8 will only occur if we end up needing a new RC for other reasons. |
Context: bazelbuild/rules_scala#1652 (comment) This will fix the issue in Bazel@HEAD, and the primary motivation is to turn downstream CI green. On the off-chance we are making a new Bazel 8 RC, we can include this. Otherwise, maybe this can go in 8.1.0 PiperOrigin-RevId: 701260369 Change-Id: If62eb015b5220b574ce34a26a194d2722021082f
Moves functions out of `//scala:scala.bzl` and updates `WORKSPACE` to load `//scala:toolchains.bzl` to avoid importing macros that depend on `JavaInfo` and `java_common` during `WORKSPACE` evaluation. Based on advice from @hvadehra in bazelbuild#1652. I haven't tried this under Bzlmod yet, and it still fails with the following error. This is due to bumping to Protobuf v29.0 and protobuf-java:4.29.0, and I believe I can update `ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala` to fix this. But the point is that I do _not_ have to `load()` files from `@rules_java` after all. ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.scalaName(DescriptorImplicits.scala:207) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.validateField(ProtoValidation.scala:121) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateMessage$3(ProtoValidation.scala:56) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateMessage$3$adapted(ProtoValidation.scala:56) at scala.collection.Iterator.foreach(Iterator.scala:943) at scala.collection.Iterator.foreach$(Iterator.scala:943) at scala.collection.AbstractIterator.foreach(Iterator.scala:1431) at scala.collection.IterableLike.foreach(IterableLike.scala:74) at scala.collection.IterableLike.foreach$(IterableLike.scala:73) at scala.collection.AbstractIterable.foreach(Iterable.scala:56) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.validateMessage(ProtoValidation.scala:56) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateFile$2(ProtoValidation.scala:17) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateFile$2$adapted(ProtoValidation.scala:17) at scala.collection.Iterator.foreach(Iterator.scala:943) at scala.collection.Iterator.foreach$(Iterator.scala:943) at scala.collection.AbstractIterator.foreach(Iterator.scala:1431) at scala.collection.IterableLike.foreach(IterableLike.scala:74) at scala.collection.IterableLike.foreach$(IterableLike.scala:73) at scala.collection.AbstractIterable.foreach(Iterable.scala:56) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.validateFile(ProtoValidation.scala:17) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateFiles$1(ProtoValidation.scala:10) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.$anonfun$validateFiles$1$adapted(ProtoValidation.scala:10) at scala.collection.immutable.Stream.foreach(Stream.scala:533) at scalapb.compiler.ProtoValidation.validateFiles(ProtoValidation.scala:10) at scalarules.test.extra_protobuf_generator.ExtraProtobufGenerator$.handleCodeGeneratorRequest(ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala:86) at scalarules.test.extra_protobuf_generator.ExtraProtobufGenerator$.run(ExtraProtobufGenerator.scala:55) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.$anonfun$runWithBytes$1(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at scala.util.Try$.apply(Try.scala:213) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithBytes(PluginFrontend.scala:51) at protocbridge.frontend.PluginFrontend$.runWithInputStream(PluginFrontend.scala:121) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$2(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:40) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.java:23) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1$$anon$2.block(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:75) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.managedBlock(ForkJoinPool.java:3118) at scala.concurrent.impl.ExecutionContextImpl$DefaultThreadFactory$$anon$1.blockOn(ExecutionContextImpl.scala:87) at scala.concurrent.package$.blocking(package.scala:146) at protocbridge.frontend.PosixPluginFrontend$.$anonfun$prepare$1(PosixPluginFrontend.scala:38) at scala.runtime.java8.JFunction0$mcV$sp.apply(JFunction0$mcV$sp.java:23) at scala.concurrent.Future$.$anonfun$apply$1(Future.scala:659) at scala.util.Success.$anonfun$map$1(Try.scala:255) at scala.util.Success.map(Try.scala:213) at scala.concurrent.Future.$anonfun$map$1(Future.scala:292) at scala.concurrent.impl.Promise.$anonfun$transform$1(Promise.scala:42) at scala.concurrent.impl.CallbackRunnable.run(Promise.scala:74) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1426) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:290) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1020) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1656) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1594) at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:183) java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
@hvadehra Thanks for the hint about partitioning the As noted in the commit message, I haven't tried it under Bzlmod yet. Update: Ah, I forgot to bump the ScalaPB version to 1.0.0-alpha.1. Once I did that, success! I can actually begin to land the Going to play with this some more in the coming days to see what I find out. @simuons and @liucijus Here's a heads-up that I may start sending pull requests related to these findings. |
Every Scala version now uses com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java:4.29.0. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. This is necessary, but not sufficient, to make `rules_scala` Bazel 8 compatible by enabling an update to `protobuf` v29.0. Building with Bazel 6.5.0 and `protobuf` v21.7 continues to pass all tests after this change.
Ensures we get all the versions of dependencies we want in `WORKSPACE`, while providing a new API to consumers. Part of bazelbuild#1652.
Ensures we get all the versions of dependencies we want in `WORKSPACE`, while providing a new API to consumers. Part of bazelbuild#1652.
Ensures we get all the versions of dependencies we want in `WORKSPACE`, while providing a new API to consumers. Part of bazelbuild#1652.
Ensures we get all the versions of dependencies we want in `WORKSPACE`, while providing a new API to consumers. Part of bazelbuild#1652. Bumps several packages as high as they can go and still be compatible with Bazel 6 and 7: - `bazel_skylib`: 1.4.1 => 1.7.1 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.6 => 0.0.9 - `rules_python`: 0.36.0 => 0.38.0 - `rules_go`: 0.50.1 The following packages are at the maximum version to prevent breakages under Bazel 6.5.0. --- `abseil-cpp` and `protobuf` have to stay at 20220623.1 and v27.1, respectively, for Bazel 6 compatibility per bazelbuild#1647. `protobuf` up to v25.5 is compatible with Bazel 6 provided users set the compiler flags mentioned in that issue. --- `rules_python` 0.38.0 => 0.39.0 requires at least `rules_cc` 0.0.10, which introduced `cc/common/cc_info.bzl`: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... [ ...snip... ] ERROR: error loading package under directory 'test': error loading package 'test': at .../external/rules_python/python/defs.bzl:17:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/py_binary.bzl:18:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/private/py_binary_macro.bzl:16:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/private/common_bazel.bzl:19:6: Label '@rules_cc//cc/common:cc_info.bzl' is invalid because 'cc/common' is not a package; perhaps you meant to put the colon here: '@rules_cc//cc:common/cc_info.bzl'? ``` --- `rules_cc` 0.0.9 => 0.10.0 requires Bazel 7, which defines `CcSharedLibraryHintInfo`: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... ERROR: .../external/rules_cc/cc/private/rules_impl/native.bzl:40:33: name 'CcSharedLibraryHintInfo' is not defined (did you mean 'CcSharedLibraryInfo'?) [ ...snip... ] ERROR: error loading package under directory 'test': error loading package 'test': at .../external/rules_python/python/defs.bzl:17:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/py_binary.bzl:18:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/private/py_binary_macro.bzl:16:6: at .../external/rules_python/python/private/common_bazel.bzl:18:6: at .../external/rules_cc/cc/common/cc_common.bzl:17:6: compilation of module 'cc/private/rules_impl/native.bzl' failed ``` --- `rules_java` remains at 7.9.0 due to the more complicated situation it presents. The current version that could be compatible with Bazel 6 and 7 is 7.12.2. As it turns out, we could include `rules_java` versions up to and including 7.12.2 if we don't call the following in `WORKSPACE`: ```py load("@rules_java//java:repositories.bzl", "rules_java_dependencies", "rules_java_toolchains") rules_java_dependencies() rules_java_toolchains() ``` In fact, __we don't do that today__. When we do, Bazel 7.4.1 builds successfully, but Bazel 6.5.2 fails with: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... ERROR: .../external/rules_java/toolchains/java_toolchain_alias.bzl:83:34: Use of Starlark transition without allowlist attribute '_allowlist_function_transition'. See Starlark transitions documentation for details and usage: @rules_java//toolchains:java_toolchain_alias.bzl NORMAL ERROR: .../src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/coverage/instrumenter/BUILD:3:12: While resolving toolchains for target //src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/coverage/instrumenter:instrumenter: invalid registered toolchain '//toolchains:all': while parsing '//toolchains:all': error loading package '@rules_java//toolchains': initialization of module 'toolchains/java_toolchain_alias.bzl' failed ERROR: Analysis of target '//src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/coverage/instrumenter:instrumenter' failed; build aborted: ``` When we bump to rules_java 7.10.0, which contains bazelbuild/rules_java#210, Bazel 7.4.1 fails with: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... ERROR: .../external/rules_java_builtin/toolchains/BUILD:254:14: While resolving toolchains for target @@rules_java_builtin//toolchains:platformclasspath (096dcc8): No matching toolchains found for types @@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:bootstrap_runtime_toolchain_type. To debug, rerun with --toolchain_resolution_debug='@@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:bootstrap_runtime_toolchain_type' If platforms or toolchains are a new concept for you, we'd encourage reading https://bazel.build/concepts/platforms-intro. ERROR: Analysis of target '//test/toolchains:java21_toolchain' failed; build aborted: Analysis failed ``` This is the error I described in bazelbuild#1619, under "Bump to rules_java 7.9.0 for Bazel 7 compatibility" in the message for commit cd22d88. Today I rediscovered: - bazelbuild/rules_java: Regression with @@rules_java//toolchains:bootstrap_runtime_toolchain_type in 7.10.0 bazelbuild/rules_java#214 But even worse, Bazel 6.5.0 fails with: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... [ ...snip... ] ERROR: .../test/src/main/resources/java_sources/BUILD:5:14: Building test/src/main/resources/java_sources/CompiledWithJava8_java.jar (1 source file) failed: Worker process did not return a WorkResponse: ---8<---8<--- Start of log, file at .../bazel-workers/multiplex-worker-18-Javac.log ---8<---8<--- Error thrown by worker thread, shutting down worker. java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Iterable com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.javac.BlazeJavacMain$ClassloaderMaskingFileManager.getJavaFileObjectsFromPaths(java.util.Collection)' at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.javac.BlazeJavacMain.compile(BlazeJavacMain.java:142) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.ReducedClasspathJavaLibraryBuilder.compileSources(ReducedClasspathJavaLibraryBuilder.java:57) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.compileJavaLibrary(SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.java:110) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.run(SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.java:118) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.build(BazelJavaBuilder.java:111) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.parseAndBuild(BazelJavaBuilder.java:91) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.lambda$main$0(BazelJavaBuilder.java:52) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler$WorkRequestCallback.apply(WorkRequestHandler.java:252) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler.respondToRequest(WorkRequestHandler.java:480) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler.lambda$startResponseThread$1(WorkRequestHandler.java:433) at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:829) ---8<---8<--- End of log ---8<---8<--- ERROR: .../test/src/main/resources/java_sources/BUILD:11:14: Building test/src/main/resources/java_sources/CompiledWithJava11_java.jar (1 source file) failed: Worker process did not return a WorkResponse: ---8<---8<--- Start of log, file at .../bazel-workers/multiplex-worker-18-Javac.log ---8<---8<--- Error thrown by worker thread, shutting down worker. java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Iterable com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.javac.BlazeJavacMain$ClassloaderMaskingFileManager.getJavaFileObjectsFromPaths(java.util.Collection)' at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.javac.BlazeJavacMain.compile(BlazeJavacMain.java:142) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.ReducedClasspathJavaLibraryBuilder.compileSources(ReducedClasspathJavaLibraryBuilder.java:57) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.compileJavaLibrary(SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.java:110) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.run(SimpleJavaLibraryBuilder.java:118) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.build(BazelJavaBuilder.java:111) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.parseAndBuild(BazelJavaBuilder.java:91) at com.google.devtools.build.buildjar.BazelJavaBuilder.lambda$main$0(BazelJavaBuilder.java:52) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler$WorkRequestCallback.apply(WorkRequestHandler.java:252) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler.respondToRequest(WorkRequestHandler.java:480) at com.google.devtools.build.lib.worker.WorkRequestHandler.lambda$startResponseThread$1(WorkRequestHandler.java:433) at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:829) ---8<---8<--- End of log ---8<---8<--- ``` In bazelbuild#1619, I thought we wanted to keep `@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:` as the canonical Java toolchains package, instead of `@rules_java//toolchains:`. But based on this comment from @fmeum, I'm inclined to believe switching to `@rules_java//toolchains:` actually is the preferred, futureproof approach: - bazelbuild/rules_java#214 (comment) --- Bazel 8 requires `rules_java` 8, per bazelbuild#1652. We can't update to `rules_java` 8 right now, unless we decided to do the following: - Tell Bazel 6 users to add C++ compiler flags to support the newer `abseil-cpp` versions required by newer `protobuf` versions. - Abandon Bazel 6 support in favor of supporting Bazel 7 at a minimum. - In addition to either of the above cases, update ScalaPB to 1.0.0-alpha.1 or higher to support `protobuf` v28. Here are the details explaining why `rules_java` 8 currently breaks. `rules_java` 8.0.0 requires Bazel >= 7.3.2, which provides the `subrule` API. Compatibility with Bazel >= 6.3.0 isn't restored until `rules_java` 8.3.2. ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... ERROR: .../external/rules_java/java/common/rules/android_lint.bzl:142:24: name 'subrule' is not defined (did you mean 'rule'?) ERROR: Error computing the main repository mapping: at .../scala/private/extensions/dev_deps.bzl:8:6: at .../external/rules_java/java/repositories.bzl:20:6: at .../external/rules_java/toolchains/local_java_repository.bzl:17:6: at .../external/rules_java/java/defs.bzl:18:6: at .../external/rules_java/java/java_library.bzl:16:6: at .../external/rules_java/java/bazel/rules/bazel_java_library.bzl:21:6: compilation of module 'java/common/rules/android_lint.bzl' failed ``` `rules_java` 8.3.0 is broken, as it can't find its own `@compatibility_proxy` repo: ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... ERROR: error loading package under directory 'src': error loading package 'src/protobuf/io/bazel/rules_scala': at .../external/rules_java/java/defs.bzl:22:6: at .../external/rules_java/java/java_test.bzl:16:6: Unable to find package for @compatibility_proxy//:proxy.bzl: The repository '@compatibility_proxy' could not be resolved: Repository '@compatibility_proxy' is not defined. ``` `rules_java` 8.3.1 seems to fix this, presumably by importing the `protobuf` repo as `com_google_protobuf`. However, it now requires at least `protobuf` v27.0, which adds `bazel/java/lite_proto_library.bzl`. Per bazelbuild#1647, we'd have to update to ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 to support `protobuf` v28, abandoning users of previous `protobuf` versions or forcing them to upgrade. ```txt $ bazel build //{src,test,third_party,scala_proto}/... [...snip...] ERROR: error loading package under directory 'src': error loading package 'src/java/io/bazel/rulesscala/worker': at .../external/rules_java/java/defs.bzl:16:6: Label '@com_google_protobuf//bazel:java_lite_proto_library.bzl' is invalid because 'bazel' is not a package; perhaps you meant to put the colon here: '@com_google_protobuf//:bazel/java_lite_proto_library.bzl'? ```
Updates almost all dependencies on `@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:` toolchain targets and `.bzl` files to corresponding targets and files in `@rules_java//toolchains:`. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. All dependencies on `@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:toolchain_type` remain, however, as there is not yet a corresponding target in `@rules_java//toolchains:`. Adds the `WORKSPACE` stanza recommended in the `rules_java` release notes, and removes our own calls to instantiate `rules_java` repos and to register `rules_java` toolchains. These changes are required to avoid build breakages when updating to `rules_scala` 7.10.0 and higher. All targets build and all tests pass under Bazel 6.5.0 and 7.4.1. --- I was on the right track in my analysis from bazelbuild#1619 ("Bump to rules_java 7.9.0 for Bazel 7 compatibility" in the message for commit cd22d88). However, I thought we _shouldn't_ update any targets from `@bazel_tools//tools/jdk:` to `@rules_java//toolchains:`. That's why I thought we were stuck on `rules_java` 7.9.0. However, this comment from @fmeum made me think switching to `@rules_java//toolchains:` actually is the preferred approach: - bazelbuild/rules_java#214 (comment) So this is a potentially breaking change, but in the good kind of way, in that it requires an easy, future proof update.
It's not just `rules_java` in the new preamble, but that's what's precipitating the change. This preamble also works under Bazel 8, per my investigation in bazelbuild#1652.
Removes this symbol from `scala/scala.bzl` as well as `setup_scala_testing_toolchain`, and deletes `scala/private/macros/toolchains.bzl`. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. This is required for Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 compatibility, but is also compatible with Bazel 6 and 7. In bazelbuild#1652, @hvadehra suggested partitioning the `.bzl` files such that `WORKSPACE` doesn't `load` a file that tries to `load` symbols from `rules_java`. I successfully did so in a separate branch, and along with other minor changes, got `rules_scala` to build with `rules_java` 8.5.1. The other changes will come in separate pull requests, but it makes sense to land this change now before adding any other toolchains to `scala_toolchains`. --- Arguably, we should remove all macros exported from `scala/scala.bzl` that only instantiate toolchain dependencies and define toolchains. That may be a breaking change for some users, but will ultimately be necessary for these macros to remain compatible with Bazel 8.
Adds the jmh toolchain to `scala_toolchains()` and moves `jmh_repositories()` to `jmh/toolchain/toolchain.bzl` for `rules_java` 8 compatibility. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652.
This is the last of the toolchain to receive the "toolchainization" treatment prior to Bzlmodification, and moves `twitter_scrooge()` to `twitter_scrooge/toolchain/toolchain.bzl` for `rules_java` 8 compatibility. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652.
Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. Stops `protoc` recompilation, and fixes the build breakage in bazelbuild#1710 due to `protobuf` include paths exceeding the Visual Studio path length limit. The updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl` were inspired by: - protocolbuffers/protobuf: bazel: Remove hardcoded dependency on //:protoc from language runtimes #19679 protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679 The `proto_lang_toolchain` call was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Adds `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` to automatically update `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. This should make builds of `rules_scala` much faster all around. Given the fact that this feature depends on recent `protobuf` versions, and the Windows `protobuf` build breaks without it, we have a catch-22. It likely can't be separated from the rest of bazelbuild#1710, though I would prefer that. It also seems likely that we'd eventually need to do this to continue supporting Windows, per: - protocolbuffers/protobuf#12947 - https://protobuf.dev/news/v30/#poison-msvc--bazel - protocolbuffers/protobuf#20085 More background on proto toolchainization: - Proto Toolchainisation Design Doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CE6wJHNfKbUPBr7-mmk_0Yo3a4TaqcTPE0OWNuQkhPs/edit - bazelbuild/bazel: Protobuf repo recompilation sensitivity bazelbuild/bazel#7095 - bazelbuild/rules_proto: Implement proto toolchainisation bazelbuild/rules_proto#179 - rules_proto 6.0.0 release notes mentioning Protobuf Toolchainisation https://github.com./bazelbuild/rules_proto/releases/tag/6.0.0
Another (not so) weekly update: #1482 (comment) If #1710 goes in as-is, it will close this issue. |
Dependency version updates that still work with Bazel 6.5.0 and 7.5.0. Broken out from bazelbuild#1710, and part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. Updates `.bazelversion` files to 7.5.0 and the CI builds in `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to use Bazel 7.5.0. Bumps the following dependencies, which should not cause build breakages on Windows + MSVC: - Go: 1.24.0 => 1.24.1 - Scalafmt: 3.9.1 => 3.9.2 - `abseil-cpp`: 20220623.1 => 20250127.0 - `grpc`: 1.70.0 => 1.71.1 - `protobuf-java`: 4.29.3 => 4.30.0 - `sbt-compiler-interface`: 1.10.7 => 1.10.8 - `sbt-compiler-util`: 1.10.7 => 1.10.10 - `google-common-protos`: 2.52.0 => 2.53.0 Defers the following updates, which are already present in bazelbuild#1710: - `protobuf`: v21.7 => v28.3 (or v30.0) - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `scalapb`: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha1 These deferred updates all need to happen together, as updating only a subset of them will break the build. This change is smaller and more focused than bazelbuild#1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review.
Updates the `protobuf` version to one that's still compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 and 7.5.0 without updating `scalapb`. Broken out from bazelbuild#1710, and part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. Like bazelbuild#1711, updates `.bazelversion` files to 7.5.0 and the CI builds in `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to use Bazel 7.5.0. Unlike bazelbuild#1711, contains only these updates: - `abseil-cpp`: 20220623.1 => 20250127.0 - `protobuf`: v21.7 => v25.6 This change aims make bazelbuild#1710 smaller and more focused, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review. Specifically, this is an attempt to see whether MSVC will build successfully with `protobuf` v25.6. If it doesn't, I will update this change to include the protocol compiler toolchainization changes from bazelbuild#1710.
Adds the `examples/overridden_artifacts` repository and the corresponding `overridden_artifacts_example` test case in `test/shell/test_examples.sh`. Broken out from bazelbuild#1710, and part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. @dmivankov noticed the design bug in the upcoming Bzlmod API for `overridden_artifacts` that this change addresses. See: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) Makes `_validate_scalac_srcjar()` and `dt_patched_compiler_setup()` in `scala/private/macros/scala_repositories.bzl` more tolerant of dictionaries containing keys mapped to `None`. The new `overridden_artifacts_example` test covers this. Sets `.bazelversion` in the new repo to 7.5.0 to match changes in both bazelbuild#1710 and bazelbuild#1711. This change is smaller and more focused than bazelbuild#1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review.
Contains many editorial improvements to and some extra information in the README, along with a few small improvements to the code. Broken out from bazelbuild#1710, and part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. Specifically: - Adds more info on translating `@rules_scala` to `@io_bazel_rules_scala` for dependencies via repo mapping. - Merges information about the previously planned `rules_scala` 8.0.0 release into the information for 7.0.0, since it seems we may make only one major release. - Improves information about `protobuf` support for versions before v28, Scala 2.11, and the upcoming Bzlmod `compatibility_level` setting. - In `scala_config.bzl`, changes the private `_default_scala_version()` to the public `DEFAULT_SCALA_VERSION`. - Adds `allow_empty = True` to a `glob` expression in `//test/semanticdb:lib_with_tempsrc`. - Removes Scala 2.11 test cases from `test_thirdparty_version.sh` and `test_version.sh`. This change is smaller and more focused than bazelbuild#1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review. The motivations for the individual changes are: - The public `DEFAULT_SCALA_VERSION` constant makes this value accessible to the upcoming module extension. - `glob` requires an explicit `allow_empty = True` parameter in Bazel 8, in which `--incompatible_disallow_empty_glob` defaults to `True`. - ScalaPB 0.9.8, the last version compatible with Scala 2.11, does not support `protobuf` v25.6 or later. For this reason, we must remove the Scala 2.11 test cases, as documented in the `README.md` updates. See also bazelbuild#1712. We should consider dropping Scala 2.11 support at this point, since there's no ScalaPB release for it that supports later versions of `protobuf`. That, and we could remove some of the special case code added in the following changes, amongst other 2.11 support details: - bazelbuild#1631 - bazelbuild#1648 - bazelbuild#1687 - bazelbuild#1688
* 7.0.0 README updates and minor code changes Contains many editorial improvements to and some extra information in the README, along with a few small improvements to the code. Broken out from #1710, and part of #1482 and #1652. Specifically: - Adds more info on translating `@rules_scala` to `@io_bazel_rules_scala` for dependencies via repo mapping. - Merges information about the previously planned `rules_scala` 8.0.0 release into the information for 7.0.0, since it seems we may make only one major release. - Improves information about `protobuf` support for versions before v28, Scala 2.11, and the upcoming Bzlmod `compatibility_level` setting. - In `scala_config.bzl`, changes the private `_default_scala_version()` to the public `DEFAULT_SCALA_VERSION`. - Adds `allow_empty = True` to a `glob` expression in `//test/semanticdb:lib_with_tempsrc`. - Removes Scala 2.11 test cases from `test_thirdparty_version.sh` and `test_version.sh`. This change is smaller and more focused than #1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review. The motivations for the individual changes are: - The public `DEFAULT_SCALA_VERSION` constant makes this value accessible to the upcoming module extension. - `glob` requires an explicit `allow_empty = True` parameter in Bazel 8, in which `--incompatible_disallow_empty_glob` defaults to `True`. - ScalaPB 0.9.8, the last version compatible with Scala 2.11, does not support `protobuf` v25.6 or later. For this reason, we must remove the Scala 2.11 test cases, as documented in the `README.md` updates. See also #1712. We should consider dropping Scala 2.11 support at this point, since there's no ScalaPB release for it that supports later versions of `protobuf`. That, and we could remove some of the special case code added in the following changes, amongst other 2.11 support details: - #1631 - #1648 - #1687 - #1688 * Tweak `rules_python` and Bazel 6.5.0 `README` info Provided a better explanation for using `rules_python` 0.38.0 for now. Improved some of the language in the Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility section.
Adds the `examples/overridden_artifacts` repository and the corresponding `overridden_artifacts_example` test case in `test/shell/test_examples.sh`. Broken out from #1710, and part of #1482 and #1652. @dmivankov noticed the design bug in the upcoming Bzlmod API for `overridden_artifacts` that this change addresses. See: - #1482 (comment) - #1482 (comment) Makes `_validate_scalac_srcjar()` and `dt_patched_compiler_setup()` in `scala/private/macros/scala_repositories.bzl` more tolerant of dictionaries containing keys mapped to `None`. The new `overridden_artifacts_example` test covers this. Sets `.bazelversion` in the new repo to 7.5.0 to match changes in both #1710 and #1711. This change is smaller and more focused than #1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review.
* Bazel 7 and MSVC compatible version updates Dependency version updates that still work with Bazel 6.5.0 and 7.5.0. Broken out from #1710, and part of #1482 and #1652. Updates `.bazelversion` files to 7.5.0 and the CI builds in `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to use Bazel 7.5.0. Bumps the following dependencies, which should not cause build breakages on Windows + MSVC: - Go: 1.24.0 => 1.24.1 - Scalafmt: 3.9.1 => 3.9.2 - `abseil-cpp`: 20220623.1 => 20250127.0 - `grpc`: 1.70.0 => 1.71.1 - `protobuf-java`: 4.29.3 => 4.30.0 - `sbt-compiler-interface`: 1.10.7 => 1.10.8 - `sbt-compiler-util`: 1.10.7 => 1.10.10 - `google-common-protos`: 2.52.0 => 2.53.0 Defers the following updates, which are already present in #1710: - `protobuf`: v21.7 => v28.3 (or v30.0) - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `scalapb`: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha1 These deferred updates all need to happen together, as updating only a subset of them will break the build. This change is smaller and more focused than #1710, and should ultimately make that pull request smaller and/or easier to review. * Add `abseil-cpp` repo mapping to `protobuf` This will make sure `protobuf` uses the version of `abseil-cpp` that we import. * Set `common --enable_workspace --noenable_bzlmod` These flags affect `bazel query`, and Bazel 8 defaults to `--noenable_workspace --enable_bzlmod`. Using `common` ensures `bazel query` sees the same settings as `bazel build`. This prevents the `WORKSPACE` run of `test_semanticdb_handles_removed_sourcefiles` from failing under Bazel 8. Bazel 6.5.0 doesn't define `--[no]enable_workspace`, so it makes sense to include it in the change that sets all `.bazelversion` files to 7.5.0.
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.5.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - Scalafmt: 3.9.2 => 3.9.3 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.10.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.0 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains(//protoc:all)` toolchains is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Bumps Scalafmt to 3.9.3 out of convenience. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I updated `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` to use `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()`: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
Fixes silently broken tests depending on `test_version/test_reporter` and adds an assertion to avoid future silent breakages. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. - Moves `test_version/version_specific_tests_dir/scala_repositories.bzl` to `test_version`. - Updates `test_version.sh` to copy this file into test repos generated from both `version_specific_tests_dir` and `test_reporter`. - Updates `compilation_should_fail` to break if the `bazel build` output doesn't contain the expected `ErrorFile.scala` error. The affected test cases expect their underlying builds to fail because of errors in `test_version/test_reporter/ErrorFile.scala`. Failing Scala 2.x build output should contain: ```txt ErrorFile.scala:6: ')' expected but '}' found ``` Failing Scala 3.x build output should contain: ```txt -- [E040] Syntax Error: ErrorFile.scala:6:2 ------------------------------------ 6 | } | ^ | ')' expected, but '}' found ``` Using `RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY` to select an affected test case revealed that the underlying build actually failed because Bazel couldn't find `//:scrooge_repositories.bzl`: ```txt $ RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY="test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain" \ ./test_version.sh running test test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it... Computing main repo mapping: ERROR: Error computing the main repository mapping: cannot load '//:scrooge_repositories.bzl': no such file $ echo $? 0 ```
Fixes silently broken tests depending on `test_version/test_reporter` and adds an assertion to avoid future silent breakages. Part of bazelbuild#1482 and bazelbuild#1652. - Moves `test_version/version_specific_tests_dir/scala_repositories.bzl` to `test_version`. - Updates `test_version.sh` to copy this file into test repos generated from both `version_specific_tests_dir` and `test_reporter`. - Updates `compilation_should_fail` to break if the `bazel build` output doesn't contain the expected `ErrorFile.scala` error. The affected test cases expect their underlying builds to fail because of errors in `test_version/test_reporter/ErrorFile.scala`. Failing Scala 2.x build output should contain: ```txt ErrorFile.scala:6: ')' expected but '}' found ``` Failing Scala 3.x build output should contain: ```txt -- [E040] Syntax Error: ErrorFile.scala:6:2 ------------------------------------ 6 | } | ^ | ')' expected, but '}' found ``` Using `RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY` to select an affected test case revealed that the underlying build actually failed because Bazel couldn't find `//:scrooge_repositories.bzl`: ```txt $ RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY="test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain" \ ./test_version.sh running test test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it... Computing main repo mapping: ERROR: Error computing the main repository mapping: cannot load '//:scrooge_repositories.bzl': no such file $ echo $? 0 ```
Fixes silently broken tests depending on `test_version/test_reporter` and adds an assertion to avoid future silent breakages. Part of #1482 and #1652. - Moves `test_version/version_specific_tests_dir/scala_repositories.bzl` to `test_version`. - Updates `test_version.sh` to copy this file into test repos generated from both `version_specific_tests_dir` and `test_reporter`. - Updates `compilation_should_fail` to break if the `bazel build` output doesn't contain the expected `ErrorFile.scala` error. The affected test cases expect their underlying builds to fail because of errors in `test_version/test_reporter/ErrorFile.scala`. Failing Scala 2.x build output should contain: ```txt ErrorFile.scala:6: ')' expected but '}' found ``` Failing Scala 3.x build output should contain: ```txt -- [E040] Syntax Error: ErrorFile.scala:6:2 ------------------------------------ 6 | } | ^ | ')' expected, but '}' found ``` Using `RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY` to select an affected test case revealed that the underlying build actually failed because Bazel couldn't find `//:scrooge_repositories.bzl`: ```txt $ RULES_SCALA_TEST_ONLY="test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain" \ ./test_version.sh running test test_reporter 2.12.20 //:diagnostics_reporter_toolchain Starting local Bazel server and connecting to it... Computing main repo mapping: ERROR: Error computing the main repository mapping: cannot load '//:scrooge_repositories.bzl': no such file $ echo $? 0 ```
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.5.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - Scalafmt: 3.9.2 => 3.9.3 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.10.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.0 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains(//protoc:all)` toolchains is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Bumps Scalafmt to 3.9.3 out of convenience. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I updated `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` to use `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()`: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
Weekly update: #1482 (comment) |
Weekly update: #1482 (comment) |
Weekly update: #1482 (comment) |
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.6.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.11.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_protoc_toolchains//:all")` is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Adds the `scala` parameter to `scala_toolchains()` to control whether it instantiates the builtin Scala toolchains. Removes the `if len(toolchains) == 0` check from `_scala_toolchains_repo_impl`. The Scala version check will now happen only when both `scala` and `validate_scala_version` are `True`, which is essentially how the previous API worked. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. Disabling the default Scala toolchain via `scala_toolchains(scala = False)` avoids instantiating any builtin compiler JAR repos or validating the Scala version. This enables users defining custom Scala toolchains using their own JARs to still use other builtin toolchains. This was prompted by: bazelbuild#1710 (comment) Removing the `if len(toolchains) == 0` covers the case in the upcoming Bzlmod implementation whereby the root module may explicitly disable all builtin toolchains. This avoids potential breakage of the `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_toolchains//...:all")` call from the upcoming `MODULE.bazel` file. Removing the `scala_register_toolchains()` calls from the `dt_patches/test_dt_patches*/WORKSPACE` files proves that those calls were harmless, but ultimately unnecessary. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I updated `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` to use `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()`: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.6.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.11.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_protoc_toolchains//:all")` is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Adds the `scala` parameter to `scala_toolchains()` to control whether it instantiates the builtin Scala toolchains. Removes the `if len(toolchains) == 0` check from `_scala_toolchains_repo_impl`. The Scala version check will now happen only when both `scala` and `validate_scala_version` are `True`, which is essentially how the previous API worked. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. Disabling the default Scala toolchain via `scala_toolchains(scala = False)` avoids instantiating any builtin compiler JAR repos or validating the Scala version. This enables users defining custom Scala toolchains using their own JARs to still use other builtin toolchains. This was prompted by: bazelbuild#1710 (comment) Removing the `if len(toolchains) == 0` covers the case in the upcoming Bzlmod implementation whereby the root module may explicitly disable all builtin toolchains. This avoids potential breakage of the `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_toolchains//...:all")` call from the upcoming `MODULE.bazel` file. Removing the `scala_register_toolchains()` calls from the `dt_patches/test_dt_patches*/WORKSPACE` files proves that those calls were harmless, but ultimately unnecessary. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I updated `protoc/private/protoc_toolchain.bzl` to use `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()`: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.6.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.11.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_protoc_toolchains//:all")` is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchains.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Adds the `scala` parameter to `scala_toolchains()` to control whether it instantiates the builtin Scala toolchains. Removes the `if len(toolchains) == 0` check from `_scala_toolchains_repo_impl`. The Scala version check will now happen only when both `scala` and `validate_scala_version` are `True`, which is essentially how the previous API worked. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. Disabling the default Scala toolchain via `scala_toolchains(scala = False)` avoids instantiating any builtin compiler JAR repos or validating the Scala version. This enables users defining custom Scala toolchains using their own JARs to still use other builtin toolchains. This was prompted by: bazelbuild#1710 (comment) Removing the `if len(toolchains) == 0` covers the case in the upcoming Bzlmod implementation whereby the root module may explicitly disable all builtin toolchains. This avoids potential breakage of the `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_toolchains//...:all")` call from the upcoming `MODULE.bazel` file. Removing the `scala_register_toolchains()` calls from the `dt_patches/test_dt_patches*/WORKSPACE` files proves that those calls were harmless, but ultimately unnecessary. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I tried using `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
Bumps dependencies to versions that are compatible with both Bazel 7.6.0 and 8.0.0, and adds protocol compiler toolchainization in `//protoc` for `protobuf` v29 and later. Closes bazelbuild#1652. Part of bazelbuild#1482. - ScalaPB jars: 0.11.17 => 1.0.0-alpha.1 - `rules_python`: 0.38.0 => 1.2.0 - `rules_cc`: 0.0.9 => 0.1.1 - `rules_java`: 7.12.4 => 8.11.0 - `protobuf`: 21.7 => 30.1 - `rules_proto`: 6.0.2 => 7.1.0 Bazel 6 is officially unsupported as of this change and the upcoming `rules_scala` 7.0.0 release. Updates `.bazelci/presubmit.yml` to bump the `7.x` build to `last_rc`. Registers a precompiled protocol compiler toolchain when `--incompatible_enable_proto_toolchain_resolution` is `True`. Otherwise, `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_protoc_toolchains//:all")` is a no-op, as it will be empty. `scripts/update_protoc_integrity.py` automatically updates `scala/private/protoc/protoc_integrity.bzl`. The `protobuf` patch is the `git diff` output from protocolbuffers/protobuf#19679, which also inspired the updates to `scala_proto/scala_proto_toolchain.bzl`. The `proto_lang_toolchain` call in the `BUILD` file generated by `protoc/private/protoc_toolchains.bzl` was inspired by the `README` from: - https://github.com./aspect-build/toolchains_protoc/ Loads `java_proto_library` from `com_google_protobuf`, replacing the officially deprecated version from `rules_java`. Adds the `scala` parameter to `scala_toolchains()` to control whether it instantiates the builtin Scala toolchains. Removes the `if len(toolchains) == 0` check from `_scala_toolchains_repo_impl`. The Scala version check will now happen only when both `scala` and `validate_scala_version` are `True`, which is essentially how the previous API worked. Updates to `README.md`, and updates to `WORKSPACE` and `third_party/repositories` files precipitated by the dependency updates, comprise the remainder of this change. --- We're no longer planning to support Bazel 6 in the next major release per @simuons's decision in: - bazelbuild#1482 (comment) The plan is now to land the Bazel 7 and 8 compatibility updates first, then land the Bzlmod change. This enables us to make only one new major version release, instead of two (whereby the first release would've continued supporting Bazel 6). It turns out the two major version plan wouldn't've been possible. Bazel 8 and `rules_java` 8 require `protobuf` >= v29, but this bump caused Windows builds to break when compiling `protoc` in bazelbuild#1710. `src/google/protobuf/compiler/java/java_features.pb.h`, the path specified in the error message, doesn't exist until `protobuf` v25.0. @crt-31 and I found that this was related to the Windows/MSVC 260 character file path length limit. What's more, the `protobuf` team plans to drop MSVC support specifically because of this path length limit. The protocol compiler toolchain prevents `protoc` recompilation, which fixes the Windows breakage while making all builds faster. Since Windows builds break since at least `protobuf` v25, but `protoc` toolchainization requires v29, the version bump and the `protoc` toolchain must land together. Disabling the default Scala toolchain via `scala_toolchains(scala = False)` avoids instantiating any builtin compiler JAR repos or validating the Scala version. This enables users defining custom Scala toolchains using their own JARs to still use other builtin toolchains. This was prompted by: bazelbuild#1710 (comment) Removing the `if len(toolchains) == 0` covers the case in the upcoming Bzlmod implementation whereby the root module may explicitly disable all builtin toolchains. This avoids potential breakage of the `register_toolchains("@rules_scala_toolchains//...:all")` call from the upcoming `MODULE.bazel` file. Removing the `scala_register_toolchains()` calls from the `dt_patches/test_dt_patches*/WORKSPACE` files proves that those calls were harmless, but ultimately unnecessary. --- I tried several things to get protocol compiler toolchainization to work with `protobuf` v28.2, described below. However, each path only led to the same suffering described in the new "Why this requires `protobuf` v29 or later" section of the README. I discovered along the way that `protobuf` v30 isn't compatible with Bazel 6.5.0 at all. I added an explanation to the "Limited Bazel 6.5.0 compatibility" section of `README.md`. --- I experimented with using `protobuf` v28.2, `rules_proto` 6.0.2, and `rules_java` 7.12.4 and 8.10.0. I updated the `protobuf` patch for v28.2 with the following statements: ```py load("//bazel/common:proto_common.bzl", "proto_common") load("@rules_proto//proto:proto_common.bzl", "toolchains") _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN = "@rules_proto//proto:toolchain_type" _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR = "INCOMPATIBLE_ENABLE_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_RESOLUTION" _PROTOC_TOOLCHAINS = toolchains.use_toolchain(_PROTO_TOOLCHAIN) def _protoc_files_to_run(ctx): if getattr(proto_common, _PROTO_TOOLCHAIN_ATTR, False): ``` I tried using `proto_common` from `rules_proto`. I also created a `rules_proto` 6.0.2 patch for `proto_toolchain()` to fix a "no such package: //proto" breakage: ```diff diff --git i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl index a091b80..def2699 100644 --- i/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl +++ w/proto/private/rules/proto_toolchain.bzl @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def proto_toolchain(*, name, proto_compiler, exec_compatible_with = []): native.toolchain( name = name + "_toolchain", - toolchain_type = "//proto:toolchain_type", + toolchain_type = Label("//proto:toolchain_type"), exec_compatible_with = exec_compatible_with, target_compatible_with = [], toolchain = name, ``` I tried adding combinations of the following `--incompatible_autoload_externally` flag values to .bazelrc`: ```txt common --incompatible_autoload_externally=+@protobuf,+@rules_java ``` Nothing worked. --- After the `protobuf` v29 bump, and before the ScalaPB 1.0.0-alpha.1 bump, `scala_proto` targets would fail with the following error: ```txt ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14: ProtoScalaPBRule external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_scalapb.srcjar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/.../bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) --jvm_extra_protobuf_generator_out: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'java.lang.Object com.google.protobuf.DescriptorProtos$FieldOptions.getExtension(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$GeneratedExtension)' at scalapb.compiler.DescriptorImplicits$ExtendedFieldDescriptor.fieldOptions(DescriptorImplicits.scala:329) [ ...snip... ] java.lang.RuntimeException: Exit with code 1 at scala.sys.package$.error(package.scala:30) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.work(ScalaPBWorker.scala:44) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.persistentWorkerMain(Worker.java:96) at io.bazel.rulesscala.worker.Worker.workerMain(Worker.java:49) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker$.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala:39) at scripts.ScalaPBWorker.main(ScalaPBWorker.scala) ERROR: .../external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/BUILD.bazel:23:14 Building source jar external/com_google_protobuf/src/google/protobuf/any_proto_scalapb-src.jar failed: (Exit 1): scalapb_worker failed: error executing ProtoScalaPBRule command (from target @@com_google_protobuf//src/google/protobuf:any_proto) bazel-out/darwin_arm64-opt-exec-ST-a828a81199fe/bin/src/scala/scripts/scalapb_worker ... (remaining 2 arguments skipped) ```
When testing Bazel 8.0.0 RC versions I discovered rules_scala may be incompatible with the latest rules_java (that you in turn my need for Bazel 8.0.0).
This came out when testing a Bazel bug's solution: bazelbuild/bazel#24235.
After upgrading rules_java to 8.5.0+ rules_scala reported errors:
Please note, that rules_cc version is also too "old" for Bazel 8.0.0, so I upgraded it on my branch too explicitly. It may need to be updated in rules_scala.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: