Cleanup | Preparation for OS-independent builds

[edwardneal]

Description

This PR lays the groundwork to enable a single build of SqlClient to work for both Windows and non-Windows platforms. It also tests the water on the approach.

#3810 helped the shared SqlClient project to build by using the _WINDOWS and _UNIX conditional compilation symbols; this enables the merge to proceed, but we can move these checks to run-time and make the build process simpler.

I've started this process with a simple IsWindows member in ADP, and using this to throw PlatformNotSupportedExceptions in the three Windows-specific public types: SqlColumnEncryptionCngProvider, SqlColumnEncryptionCspProvider and SqlFileStream. As a result of this, the Unix-specific files are no longer necessary and we can remove them.

SqlFileStream makes a handful of pinvokes, and as a result I've removed the _WINDOWS guard on these pinvokes and their associated types to enable the project to compile. I expect that eventually, this'll happen to the entirety of the interop layer.

I've put some focus here on IL trimming, making sure that publishing for Unix will strip away the Windows interop layer. This procedure seems a little limited: I can't use my preferred approach of using a throw helper, because the trimmer can't see that the method throws, so keeps the code paths which use the Windows interop layer around.

@benrr101 @paulmedynski this intersects with the conversations around TargetOs going on in #3837.

Issues

None.

Testing

While SqlFileStream doesn't have any unit tests to verify that it throws a PNSE on Unix, SqlColumnEncryptionCngProvider and SqlColumnEncryptionCspProvider do. These pass.

I also created a sample application which instantiates a SqlFileStream, then published this using a Linux target with trimming enabled and viewed the result in ILSpy. Every code path except for the one which throws PlatformNotSupportedException was removed, and this led to the Windows interop layer also being removed.

[paulmedynski]

Looks good to me, with a couple of comments.

[paulmedynski]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

[github-actions]

This pull request has been marked as stale due to inactivity for more than 30 days.

If you would like to keep this pull request open, please provide an update or respond to any comments. Otherwise, it will be closed automatically in 7 days.

[edwardneal]

This PR is not stale.

[paulmedynski]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

[github-actions]

This pull request has been marked as stale due to inactivity for more than 30 days.

If you would like to keep this pull request open, please provide an update or respond to any comments. Otherwise, it will be closed automatically in 7 days.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been marked as stale due to inactivity for more than 30 days.

If you would like to keep this pull request open, please provide an update or respond to any comments. Otherwise, it will be closed automatically in 7 days.

[edwardneal]

This PR is not stale.

[paulmedynski]

@edwardneal Can you merge main and address the conflicts?

[edwardneal]

Thanks @paulmedynski, I've just merged.

[paulmedynski]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

[paulmedynski]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 90.32258% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 64.48%. Comparing base (52c7149) to head (04ee46d).
⚠️ Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...lient/src/Microsoft/Data/SqlTypes/SqlFileStream.cs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (52c7149) and HEAD (04ee46d). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (52c7149)	HEAD (04ee46d)
CI-SqlClient	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3844      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.27%   64.48%   -9.79%     
==========================================
  Files         279      271       -8     
  Lines       42980    65710   +22730     
==========================================
+ Hits        31922    42373   +10451     
- Misses      11058    23337   +12279     

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-SqlClient	?
PR-SqlClient-Project	64.48% <90.32%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.