Re: Revisiting native rust

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

Jan Danielsson <jan.m.danielsson%gmail.com@localhost> writes:

>    Out of curiosity, what is the background with regard to not
>    supporting "native" rust?  Is it purely due to versioning problems
>    (pkgsrc needs to enforce a strict version) or is it related to the
>    actual building process (compiling/linking needing to be patched in
>    some manner)?

I think it's mostly versions, as rust seems to have issues about things
changing in various versions and building issues if you are off.   But I
also think it's that nobody has tried to make it work so we don't really
know how much trouble there would be.

However, we have just crossed over into having multiple versions, so it
may be that with the "the compiler could be something other than what is
in lang/rust" ship having sailed, trying to use native might be less
incrementally troublesome than it was.

There may be other issues; I am far from a rust expert.

>    The rust commands support a +<version> argument to force a specific
>    version.

I don't see how that helps with the native rust being higher or lower
than pkgsrc rust.

>    Has this already been considered (and rejected)?

I think it's been considered lightly and nobody has a real working code
proposal to seriously think about.  We'll see if any of the rust people
have more useful comments.