[Pkg-rust-maintainers] build profiles [was : Re: Hi :)]

[Angus Lees]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 at 08:44 Luca Bruno <lucab at debian.org> wrote:

> On Monday 16 February 2015 02:04:47 Angus Lees wrote:
>
> > Oh, right - I could certainly clarify the README.Debian.
>
> I suspect most of the stuff about build-profiles and cross-compilation
> should
> go into Debian.source, as is it target to build who wants to build from the
> source package (as opposed to installing the binary).
>

Yep, I'll move it across.

Moreover, have you *really* tried cross-bootstrapping this? I tried in the
> past and to the best of my knowledge this is not possible due to how
> stage0/1/2 are being used and handled right now. Things may have changed in
> the meanwhile, though.
>

No I haven't tried cross-compiling the rust packages.  The current text was
from me learning about the (new) best-practices for bootstrapping
toolchains/circular-deps and writing some notes about how that was exposed
to the end user.  A number of the tools/steps presume the source is
currently available in the Debian archive (apt-get source ...), which of
course it isn't yet so naive cut+paste isn't possible just now.

Also, my original packaging had some additional support for cross-compilng
(passing target/host architectures through to ./configure, multiarch
packaging paths and metadata, etc) that I know is missing in the current
pkg-rust packaging - so I know it won't work until those features are
merged across at least (I'm working on that in a local branch, but it isn't
a priority atm).

Would you like me to remove the cross-compile parts from README.Debian (and
not add them to Debian.source), or leave them as-is for now?

> I also called my source package rustc, since that seemed to be the
> direction
> > upstream was heading (latest release is rustc-*.tar.gz and many pieces
> are
> > being moved out into separate projects).
>
> I agree with this view and saw that somebody already renamed it in git.
> However, we should ask for the package in NEW to be REJECTed now, otherwise
> we'll probably confuse dak later when uploading alpha2.
> Am I right?
>

Agreed, assuming the newer upload hasn't already been noticed/merged by
ftp-masters.  Afaik we're "just" waiting for the human-review step at this
point, so should we just mail them and point out the source package rename?

 - Gus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-rust-maintainers/attachments/20150303/59ed2ce1/attachment-0001.html>