Re: rust update proposal

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

nia <nia%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:

> On Sun, Jul 07, 2024 at 07:33:32AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> nia <nia%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
>> 
>> > Does the current version work on any 32-bit platform?
>> > It's failing in all the bulk builds, including armv7
>> 
>> >From ftp.netbsd.org: 
>> 
>> packages/NetBSD/x86_64/10.0_2024Q2/All/rust-1.76.0nb3.tgz
>> packages/NetBSD/x86_64/9.0_2024Q2/All/rust-1.76.0nb3.tgz
>> packages/NetBSD/i386/10.0_2024Q2/All/rust-1.76.0nb3.tgz
>> packages/NetBSD/i386/9.0_2024Q2/All/rust-1.76.0nb3.tgz
>> 
>> There have been failures to build on armv7, which have felt to me like
>> not having the required gigabytes of ram, while rust-bin-x has been ok.
>
> The build host is aarch64. Do you mean address space?

I was referring to earlier problems, where rust would build in a earmv7
chroot on an aarch64 host with lots of RAM, but would totally fail on a
RPI3.

I am not at all sure this is the same issue.

> Both "exit status 101":
>
> http://victory.netbsd.org/pkgsrc/packages/reports/2024Q2/evbarm7-10.0/20240705.0101/rust-1.76.0nb3/build.log
> http://victory.netbsd.org/pkgsrc/packages/reports/2024Q2/i386-10.0/20240705.1854/rust-1.76.0nb3/build.log
>
> Maybe we should use the C versions of libraries on all 32-bit
> platforms?

Given that they are long unmaintained, it seems more reasonable to use
the version that works with 1.76.