GNU bug report logs - #62643
[PATCH] gnu: rust-1.65: Rename package to rust-next.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: "(" <paren <at> disroot.org>, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 62643 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: [bug#62643] [PATCH] gnu: rust-1.65: Rename package to rust-next.
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2023 23:08:49 +0300

On Monday, 3 April 2023 23:05:24 IDT Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> "(" <paren <at> disroot.org> writes:
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> > On Mon Apr 3, 2023 at 3:00 PM BST, Simon Tournier wrote:
> >> * gnu/packages/rust.scm (rust-next): New exported variable, formerly
> >> known as "rust-1.65".
> > 
> > For the reasons I outlined in <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/62064#5>, we
> > can't just export RUST-1.65 as RUST-NEXT, unfortunately...
> 
> Agreed.  If there is a need for newer public rust version, please go
> through the maintainers' note above the 'rust' variable:
> 
> ;;; Note: Only the latest versions of Rust are supported and tested.  The
> ;;; intermediate rusts are built for bootstrapping purposes and should not
> ;;; be relied upon.  This is to ease maintenance and reduce the time
> ;;; required to build the full Rust bootstrap chain.
> ;;;
> ;;; Here we take the latest included Rust, make it public, and re-enable
> tests ;;; and extra components such as rustfmt.
> 
> Usually the whole collection keeps building with the latest rust version
> as it's backward compatible, I think, so it's not as much work as it may
> look like.
> 
> OK to close?

I'd rather work on upgrading the whole rust ecosystem packaged in Guix than 
keep a newer version of rust working while fielding questions about why it's 
not yet the default.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.