uv lock warning suggests non-existent --no-frozen flag

[pdecat]

Summary

When UV_FROZEN=1 is set (or frozen is set in workspace configuration), running uv lock emits a hint that doesn't work:

UV_FROZEN=1 uv lock
warning: The lockfile at `uv.lock` was only checked for validity, not whether it is up-to-date, because `UV_FROZEN=1` was provided; use `--no-frozen` or `--check` instead

UV_FROZEN=1 uv lock --no-frozen
error: unexpected argument '--no-frozen' found

  tip: a similar argument exists: '--frozen'

Usage: uv lock --check-exists

For more information, try '--help'.

That hint comes from https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/blob/0.11.9/crates/uv/src/commands/project/lock.rs#L233

Platform

Linux 7.0.0-14-generic x86_64

Version

uv 0.11.8 (x86_64-unknown-linux-musl)

Python version

Python 3.14.4

[nooscraft]

Yes, the suggestion is wrong. uv lock doesn't have a --no-frozen flag (unlike uv sync / uv run); on uv lock, --frozen is just an alias for --check-exists. Looks like the env/config branch of the warning in lock.rs was modelled on the other subcommands' flag inventory. Introduced in #17859.

The ideal fix would be to drop --no-frozen from that message so it matches the --frozen CLI branch right above (use --check instead). While I was looking, the Configuration half of that branch isn't actually reachable today. There's no tool.uv.frozen field in GlobalOptions, and Flag::from_config("frozen") is never constructed anywhere in the tree (only offline is). The warning only ever fires on the UV_FROZEN path in practice; the workspace-config wording is plumbing without a source.