Tobias Nygren <tnn%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes: > There's no fundamental reason why i386 should be treated differently > from amd64 (or NetBSD from SunOS, or Linux). This is how we end up > with random library breakage like this. We need to move away from the > ad-hoc nature of how this currently works. I would like the bootstrap > process to be: Basically agreed, but as I see it there is - A: a build-from bootstrap method (as you describe) that compiles lang/rust - this package, or something, can also build a new bootstrap - B: on platforms where upstream publishes binaries, and those work, a rust-bin package, as a way to cope when plan A does not work - some consensus decision when to set the default RUST_TYPE to bin vs src, wtih the notion that if ought to be bin, then we have a problem with plan A and should have a get-well plan > - documented > - built from pkgsrc sources, with pkgsrc patches > - reproducable > - automated > - testable > - as statically linked needed to get rid of compat80 > this could be togglable with a "static" PKG_OPTION It could, but I'd be fine with static only unless somebody wants to do the work to make dynamic optional > - the same for all pkgsrc platforms > - the same for all architectures > > Obviously this won't happen in time for the freeze so someone will have > to manually mend the i386 breakage for now. True. Are you able to build a NetBSD/i386 bootstrap that is statically linked? Somebody else? > I think it's not that much work to set something up on Gitlab CI that > can build and publish for all our currently supported platforms. I will > try it out during the freeze. We need to be careful about chain of custody, but CI that reports if it works or not would be great.
Description: PGP signature