On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 02:55:20PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > > > > Mostly we drop the latest versions in all the time, except when we > > defer updating because of too frequent releases. But arguably at > > least kde is in a similar situation - they release frequently, we > > don't pick up each new version. > > > > Because rustc is only used by cargo and firefox, and cargo only by > > firefox, and also because on a non-workstation machine it is such a > > heavy build (slightly slower even than firefox) I think we should > > care for our users and not imply they should upgrade if the current > > version will actually be good enough. > > [...] > > > > With such an approach, I hope that at least some of the next firefox > > releases will not force people to rebuild rust. > > I agree. Since rust and cargo are only used for FF (what about Thunderbird > or Seamonkey?) then we should only consider updating rust/cargo when a new > FF version is released. >
Thanks, Bruce - for Thunderbird and Seamonkey I _think_ they are no-longer maintained by mozilla itself, so perhaps they will never need rustc. My intention on posting here was to see if there are any conflicting views - since Andy's demise, I'm not aware of anybody here who usually builds beta firefox. I'l leave this for about a day, to give people time to respond, and then I'm inclined to create meta tickets for rustc and cargo saying something like "don't update until known to be needed". For cargo that has the downside that missing one or more versions will probably need a binary to bootstrap, but my testing of the current versions on not-too-bad machines suggests that is actually quicker. It goes against "bootstrap once, then use your own previous version", of course. The danger with updating cargo whenever it releases is that I'm sure at some point it too might need a newer rust. Please note conditional tenses such as 'might' - I got burned by assuming big distros would use the apng patch for libpng, but over the years sometimes firefox's shipped png seems to have been up to date for fixing vulnerabiulities, and at other times its claimed version was apparently vulnerable. So what *actually* happens over the coming months and years is anybody's guess ;) ĸen -- Error: ( : 1) not enough arguments Don't you just love Tiny scheme ? -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
