Skip to content

chore: update dependencies to latest versions and bump MSRV to 1.63 #104

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

istankovic
Copy link

@istankovic istankovic commented May 23, 2025

In particular, wyhash has been released which moves to rand 0.9, which brings quite a few of breaking changes. Luckily, we don't depend on it too much so the move is trivial. Also bump the MSRV to 1.63 to be in sync with getrandom and rand.

In particular, wyhash has been released which moves to rand 0.9, which
brings quite a few of breaking changes. Luckily, we don't depend on it
too much so the move is trivial.
@istankovic istankovic changed the title chore: update dependencies to latest versions chore: update dependencies to latest versions and bump MSRV to 1.63 May 23, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@taiki-e taiki-e left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the PR!

@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ jobs:
# Use no-std target to ensure we don't link to std.
run: cargo build --no-default-features --features alloc --target thumbv7m-none-eabi
- name: Test wasm
run: wasm-pack test --headless --chrome
run: RUSTFLAGS='--cfg getrandom_backend="wasm_js"' wasm-pack test --headless --chrome
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unfortunately, the fact that this flag is needed indicates that the getrandom upgrade needs to be considered a breaking change for our crate as well...

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, true, I'm afraid there's no way around that.

@istankovic
Copy link
Author

@taiki-e would it be possible to merge this and release a new major version (3.0, since this is a breaking change) soon-ish?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants