On 03/17/2016 08:30 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Nicolas B. Pierron
<nicolas.b.pier...@mozilla.com> wrote:
I guess one of the thing we could do is use an alternative solution, such as
an external package manager which can work side-by-side with the host, such
as zero-install, Portage, or Nix.
I don't see how that would be any better from the distro policy
perspective than using Mozilla-shipped rustc.
This is not better from the point of view of distributions policy.
This is better because you remove a lot of unknown variables from the
equation, and rely on a real package manager to package and distribute
software with its dependencies.
If you think that doing it manually is better, I will ask you the following
questions:
- What libraries of the system do you depend on, which version?
- What versions of python, cargo, …?
- Is sh implemented as dash or bash ?
- Do you need a custom version for Linux(es), Mac, BSD?
- …
- Do you have deterministic builds of rustc?
A portable package manager should be able to hide such variability for you,
and reduce the burden of packaging.
Also note that these package managers can be installed in user-land, which
is convenient if you have no root access on your computer.
--
Nicolas B. Pierron
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
