Add macOS RIDs to code which adds ILAsm/ILDAsm dependency

[directhex]

This is the 2023 flavour of the ILAsm dependency issue mentioned on dotnet/source-build#2795

[MichaelSimons]

Do you want this in 8.0? If so, I would recommend targeting release/8.0 and it will automatically flow into main. If you target main you will have to manually backport it.

[directhex]

I have no strong feelings RE 8.0, my overall work is part of a wider VMR-everything goal for 9.0. I kinda assumed we were too late for anything in 8.0 now anyway.

If there's still some 8.0 process available, and I won't have to sit through a 60 minute Tactics meeting to plead my case, I can re-target

[MichaelSimons]

If there's still some 8.0 process available, and I won't have to sit through a 60 minute Tactics meeting to plead my case, I can re-target

Feel free to retarget - we don't need approval for this change.

[directhex]

release/8.0.1xx, right? Installer uses SDK-style branch versioning

[MichaelSimons]

release/8.0.1xx, right? Installer uses SDK-style branch versioning

correct.

[MichaelSimons]

CI failure:

/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102: Unable to find package runtime.osx-arm64.Microsoft.DotNet.ILCompiler with version (= 8.0.0-rc.1.23419.4)
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 1329 version(s) in dotnet8 [ Nearest version: 8.0.0-rc.2.23417.4 ]
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in msbuild-prerelease-with-release-version
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-eng
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-eol-transport
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-libraries-transport
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-libraries
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-public
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet-tools
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet6-transport
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet6
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet7-transport
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet7
/tmp/tmp.ft2Ub92Orz/buildBootstrapPreviouslySB.csproj : error NU1102:   - Found 0 version(s) in dotnet8-transport

I see this package/version is only available in internal feeds. @mmitche - do we not publish the artifacts we push to nuget in any public azdo feeds? How do we reference these without getting flagged by CG for accessing non-azdo feeds?

[directhex]

Yeah, I'm not sure I fully get how versioning works in the context of the VMR, will need someone source-buildy to help me understand why that's failing (also why it's adding the dependency at all when running on CentOS - surely the point of all that logic is to only depend on architecture-relevant versions of the package, not all of them ever?!)

[MichaelSimons]

surely the point of all that logic is to only depend on architecture-relevant versions of the package, not all of them ever?!)

This logic has evolved overtime and that was never considered - I logged dotnet/source-build#3631 for this. Thanks for calling this out.

[mmitche]

runtime.osx-arm64.Microsoft.DotNet.ILCompiler

dotnet-public is the nuget mirror. The RC1 version of this is on Nuget, but because the ID has never been mirrored to dotnet-public, it wasn't ingested. I've queued https://dev.azure.com/dnceng/internal/_build/results?buildId=2271480&view=results to ingest it.

[directhex]

Looks like this is green after the update merge

[MichaelSimons]

Looks like this is green after the update merge

Can you respond to Matt's comment #17385 (comment) first then I will merge.