On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Sylvestre Ledru <sle...@mozilla.com> wrote: > In Debian & Ubuntu,
I didn't find a rustc package on http://packages.ubuntu.com/ . What's the situation on Ubuntu? > we use the official binaries provided to be able to build rust. My same logic, can Mozilla-built rustc be used to build the Firefox package as far as policy matters, with exceptions and waivers taken into account, go? Or is this what's keeping rustc not getting past testing? > However, in the future, I have been told that we would be able to build rust > using rust version-1. When is rustc expected to reach that level of bootstrapping predictability? On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Sylvestre Ledru <sle...@mozilla.com> wrote: > One way which would make the life of Linux distro way easier would be > to maintain the Firefox rust code in a way it could compile using older rust > compiler. In order to be competitive, we need all leverage we can get from our Mozilla magic sauce (Rust). I think it's unacceptable to limit our ability to leverage Rust in Gecko by forgoing the ability to co-evolve Rust and Gecko at a rapid pace. > For example, imagine that the next Debian stable or Ubuntu LTS ships using > Rust 2.0, > we would make sure that the new rust code still compile with Rust 2.0 > (limiting our capability to use new > language trick). I think we must not allow ourselves to wait for a Debian or Ubuntu LTS cycle before Rust improvements can be used in Gecko. We need to leverage our advantages, such as Rust, fully to be competitive, and it would be crazy to work at LTS pace when we are free to ship to the majority of our users (on Windows and Mac) using whatever compiler works best. (In general, regardless of building Gecko, I think it would be harmful to the evolution of Rust at this stage for a version to get stuck out there for the duration of a Debian or Ubuntu LTS cycle. I agree with Brian Smith's sentiment at https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/perfecting-rust-packaging/2623/67 .) > Just like we do with C++... And we fail to make best competitive use of our time and tools with C++, too, when the latest clang, GCC and MSVC support a C++ feature, we put effort into writing code and find out it has to rot without landing because of old GCC. > Now, with my Debian/Ubuntu hat, maintaining rust backports to be able to > build new versions of Firefox on stable/LTS releases > is not going to be easy Could Firefox in Debian stable have a build dependency on rustc from Debian unstable? On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Martin Stransky <stran...@redhat.com> wrote: > Well, what about other arches? ppc(64), s390, ai64...? All architectures currently supported by Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu (but not Gentoo!) already have LLVM back ends. rustc hasn't been ported to all those architectures, but the level of effort required should be within reason considering that the LLVM back ends are there and rustc has already been ported to target multiple ones of the LLVM-supported ISAs. If distro policy bans ongoing cross-compliation, I guess the distro would need to replicate the Rust project's compiler compilation version lineage on each architecture after bootstrapping with cross-compilation. 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. -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@hsivonen.fi https://hsivonen.fi/ _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
