Add uv sync --check flag
#12342
Add uv sync --check flag
#12342
Conversation
| // Running `uv sync --check` should fail. | ||
| uv_snapshot!(context.filters(), context.sync().arg("--check"), @r###" | ||
| success: false | ||
| exit_code: 2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be exit code 2 or 1? I think we probably should use 1.
crates/uv/tests/it/sync.rs
Outdated
| Would download 1 package | ||
| Would install 1 package | ||
| + iniconfig==2.0.0 | ||
| error: The environment is out of sync and requires updates. Run `uv sync` to install or update packages. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we don't want error: here, modeling after Ruff
❯ uvx ruff format --check
Installed 1 package in 2ms
51 files already formatted
❯ echo "import bar" > test.py
❯ uvx ruff format --check
Would reformat: test.py
1 file would be reformatted, 51 files already formatted
❯ echo $?
1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
uv sync --locked already uses error: (exit code 2). Should we change both, or is it too risky due to potential breakage for users relying on the --locked exit code?
❯ uv sync --locked
Resolved 14 packages in 4ms
error: The lockfile at `uv.lock` needs to be updated, but `--locked` was provided. To update the lockfile, run `uv lock`.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm.. I'm not sure.
I think of the difference as: --check is asking uv to "check if my sync would do anything" whereas the other is asking uv to "sync but fail if the lockfile is outdated". In the first, it's not an error if sync would do something — that's the intent of the invocation. Whereas in the second, it's a failure to sync?
Unfortunately uv lock --check destroys my carefully constructed logic:
❯ uv lock --check
Using CPython 3.13.0
Resolved 4 packages in 86ms
error: The lockfile at `uv.lock` needs to be updated, but `--locked` was provided. To update the lockfile, run `uv lock`.
❯ echo $?
2
I'd honestly be partial to changing that one specifically (in a separate PR), I think it's wrong. I think it's probably breaking to change though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could be convinced to keep what you have here and change them both together in a future release.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah makes sense, I'm okay with either option, lmk. Happy to make a follow up PR fixing that!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's stick with consistency to uv lock for now and open an issue to track a broader change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah seems fine to ship this as-is and re-consider in a future release.
zanieb
added
the
enhancement
Co-authored-by: Zanie Blue <[email protected]>
|
If you're ever interested in some guidance on places we could use your help, feel free to reach out on Discord. Always appreciate your contributions. |
Summary
Closes #12338
Test Plan
cargo test