[zackees]

Why

#1664 asks that ESP framework selection be explicit: an
environment must build what it asked for, or be rejected with a precise error,
and the build metadata must say which integration mode actually ran.

#1730 landed the rejection half (a bare framework = espidf now fails before
any build work, and arduino, espidf warns that it is an Arduino-on-IDF build).
The metadata half was still missing: the ESP32 package stack summary reported
the package pins only, under a framework= label, so a reader could not tell
whether the environment requested arduino or arduino, espidf, nor which
integration mode the build used.

What changed

One build-log line, extended additively:

ESP32 packages: requested platform=…, framework=<requested>, framework_pin=<pin>,
                integration=<arduino-core|arduino-on-idf>;
                resolved platform=…@…, framework=…@…, toolchain=…@…, ESP-IDF SDK=…

• framework= — the environment's requested framework = value
  (<board default> when the key is absent). This is the field fix(esp): honor or reject IDF framework requests instead of silently building Arduino #1664 calls the
  requested framework.
• framework_pin= — the requested platform_packages framework pin. This is
  what the old line mislabelled as framework=; the requested side is not read
  by any parser (only the ; resolved segment is, in
  bench/fastled-examples), so renaming it is safe.
• integration= — arduino-core or arduino-on-idf, derived from the same
  parser reject_unsupported_esp_framework now uses, so the warning/rejection
  path and the metadata can never disagree.

The effective framework remains the resolved … framework=name@version pair,
now unambiguous against the requested value.

No build_fingerprint.json field changed, so existing warm caches are not
invalidated by this PR.

Acceptance criteria from #1664

• GREEN: requested framework honoured, or a precise unsupported-framework error (fix(esp32): reject framework = espidf instead of silently building Arduino (#1664) #1730).
• Metadata records the requested and effective frameworks and the integration mode (this PR).
• Regression coverage for framework = espidf and arduino, espidf (fix(esp32): reject framework = espidf instead of silently building Arduino (#1664) #1730) plus new
  coverage for the recorded metadata.
• No CMake/IDF component coverage is claimed anywhere; the warning and the
  integration=arduino-on-idf label both say the opposite.

Tests

soldr cargo test -p fbuild-build-esp --lib
  test result: ok. 173 passed; 0 failed; 1 ignored

New:

• requested_frameworks_parses_single_and_dual_requests — single, dual, reordered/spaced
  dual and bare espidf (unsupported ⇒ no integration mode).
• stack_summary_records_requested_framework_and_integration_mode — dual request records
  framework=arduino, espidf, integration=arduino-on-idf, the pin, and the resolved stack;
  a default environment records framework=<board default>, integration=arduino-core.

Gates on 0b0053ea:

soldr cargo fmt --all --check                         EXIT=0
soldr cargo clippy --workspace --all-targets -- -D warnings   EXIT=0
uv run python ci/check_dylint_allowlists.py           EXIT=0
uv run python ci/enforce_platform_boundary.py --print-totals  rows=44 EXIT=0

Left unmerged for the owner, per the steward merge policy.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: FastLED/fbuild
• Branch: agent/esp32-framework-metadata
• File: .coderabbit.yaml
• Commit: 0b0053e
• Layers: Repository YAML
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 248e8101-1a4e-48d3-9023-7d6876fdb9a4

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}