[release/5.0-rc2] Update dependencies from mono/linker

[dotnet-maestro]

This pull request updates the following dependencies

From https://github.com/mono/linker

• Subscription: efd96323-729a-47d5-afe2-08d849eee71f
• Build: 20200930.1
• Date Produced: 9/30/2020 8:45 AM
• Commit: bdddd557535b711c1e663392783afd2c11534a91
• Branch: refs/heads/release/5.0

• Updates:
  • Microsoft.NET.ILLink.Tasks: from 5.0.0-rc.1.20420.3 to 5.0.0-rtm.20480.1

[Dotnet-GitSync-Bot]

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

[jeffschwMSFT]

@agocke @vitek-karas what updates are we expecting from mono/linker?

[mmitche]

@agocke @vitek-karas what updates are we expecting from mono/linker?

@marek-safar Contacted me about this this morning.

[agocke]

We have two things that we're considering: a crashing bug, and moving the linker itself to target 5.0. My current understanding is that the linker can, but does not need to flow into runtime.

For the SDK, that's under the VS bar, and according to the VS schedule is open for check-in for bug fixes. Does this sound right?

[agocke]

Since I know of no linker bugs which we are considering that affect runtime itself, my proposal is that we remove the automatic integration to avoid churn, and only check the linker into the SDK.

Does anyone know of an issue with that?

[marek-safar]

Does anyone know of an issue with that?

The runtime is the only integration (complex) test suite we have. By not flowing the changes in we'll make it harder for us to use it to validate any possible further fixes.

[jeffschwMSFT]

The runtime is the only integration (complex) test suite we have.

Agreed. Is it possible to get CI validation and not merge? We have seen subtle issues be introduced with new linker versions in dotnet/runtime. Given the current version has some bake time I am more comfortable with it.

With that said, do we have good insight into all the changes that have occurred since our last dotnet/runtime integration?

[agocke]

dotnet/linker@e56c9e4...ec64f67

Changes are: fix for a customer-found crashing bug, building against the proper 5.0 cecil submodule, and dependency updates.

[sbomer]

The plan discussed with @eerhardt and @vitek-karas was to stop flowing into runtime. We actually did turn off flow to runtime in RC1, but looks like someone added it back when runtime branched for RC2. That said, I like the suggestion to use this for validation, without merging.

[mmitche]

Requesting changes to avoid accidental auto-merge

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @ViktorHofer
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[ViktorHofer]

@mmitche @marek-safar I think a linker ingestion was just approved in tactics, is that right? Should we merge this in?

[marek-safar]

No, we can close this one as there will be a newer update for release/5.0. The regression fix will flow via dotnet/sdk