public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Brian Cosgrove <[email protected]>
To: Smolkin Grigory <[email protected]>
Cc: Bradford Boyle <[email protected]>
Cc: Christoph Berg <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Packages for pg_doorman
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2025 06:30:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGKCzNCUsK4voXbKB2P8PHAQrTUJr43o-+-Qav9MLFPq7wh1sQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMp+ueYLbjjVuvUJPsi7zQSW0bM++xAcg=SR7RSSzNDmgLOqhw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMp+ueYqZNwA5SnZV3-iPOyrmQwnwabyMNMOsu-Rq0sLAa2b0g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAMp+ueYwj54J4au4+MBtgR45KWAf+JLB6PX8-QWe7md2dDwgjw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAOMoQbREwfeDARhD-Hxvfoh=oLNQWKbhxU4qdUcL80xfOQbhTQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMp+ueYLbjjVuvUJPsi7zQSW0bM++xAcg=SR7RSSzNDmgLOqhw@mail.gmail.com>
For such a new piece of infrastructure is there really a compelling reason
to support distributions older than Debian bookworm (released 3 years ago)?
Do you have any current use-cases for something older?
On Sun, Mar 16, 2025 at 4:17 AM Smolkin Grigory <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Can we use cargo vendor?
> > https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/commands/cargo-vendor.html
> >My understanding is that Debian policy >does not permit downloading
> >during the build [0].
>
> >Would it be acceptable to install the compiler from https://rustup.rs/
> during package building?
> >> My understanding is that Debian policy does not permit downloading
> during the build [0].
>
> Ok, I suppose we have to live with distribution compiler. Though, it may
> make some old systems without rust 1.70.0 unsupportable.
>
> >> According to this post [1] on the debian-rust mailing list, "vendoring
> should be avoided unless there is a very good reason not to".
> >> The Debian Rust packaging team has a pretty comprehensive guide [2] and
> it looks like they have tooling to help assist with the packaging process.
>
> I think we have a very good reason here - a lot of distributions of
> different versions with different libversions. Even making it just to be
> "compilable" would require tremendous effort, supporting it will be
> unmanageable.
>
> I see no good reason not to use vendoring in case of "multiple
> distribution"-build process.
> 1. It's a tarboll artifact, released with main project, under the same
> release tag.
> 2. It is reproducible and has public hash, so it can be verified.
> 3. It allows local build, nothing has to be downloaded.
> 4. Consistent binary behavior across multiple distributions.
>
--
Brian Cosgrove
view thread (12+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Packages for pg_doorman
In-Reply-To: <CAGKCzNCUsK4voXbKB2P8PHAQrTUJr43o-+-Qav9MLFPq7wh1sQ@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox