Bug#689207: rust: changing back from ITP to RFP
Hi, Any news on rust packaging? Riku -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#689207: rust: changing back from ITP to RFP
On 13/02/2014 09:08, Riku Voipio wrote: Hi, Any news on rust packaging? Riku Yes, Luca is touch with ftp master regarding the bootstrap issue, we are discussing with upstream on the llvm patches and we have the agreement from Mozilla GSoC admin to propose a gsoc on the packaging of rust. Cheers, Sylvestre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#689207: rust: changing back from ITP to RFP
Sylvestre Ledru sylves...@debian.org wrote: Yes, Luca is touch with ftp master regarding the bootstrap issue, we are discussing with upstream on the llvm patches and we have the agreement from Mozilla GSoC admin to propose a gsoc on the packaging of rust. I was planning to send a status update as soon as I got a quotable mail from ftp-masters, but this is taking some time so here's a partial summary. Rust packaging is currently technically feasible (see the many PPA or unofficial debs) but some legal/policy issues have to be ironed before hitting NEW. I'm collecting issues and drafts at https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/RustPackaging The main one is the bootstrapping phase, for which I have sent a mail on 07/02/14 to ftp-masters, asking for a position on the proposals at https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/RustPackaging/Bootstrap I'm currently waiting for a return on this. The other (secondary) issue is the libraries bundling, as described in https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/RustPackaging/Unbundling jemalloc is no more there, libuv is mostly synched (I was waiting for an imminent 0.12, but I won't hold my breathe anymore), gyp is a minor build annoyance, but LLVM is a big beast. For the latter, upstream is trying to catch up upstream on x86 for 1.0 (but not a blocker): https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Meeting-weekly-2014-02-04#wiki-llvm While this is an annoyance, it won't block NEW review (assuming all the copyrights are well in place) and (AFAICT) won't have an impact for -security till when we hit testing/stable (which I still consider premature now). Other items just listed in the above page are in a flux: * soname stability is much better now after[0], but I feel that the dynamic-vs-linking discussion is not yet written in stone. * rustpkg and dpkg integration is not yet there, as rustpkg was recently scrapped[1]. * I don't plan to touch multi-arch and cross-build until things are a bit more stable. * Co-installation of several versions is an open design point. PPA packages can already do that and I'd like to have it, but I like to have a proper runtime-vs-compiler split in place before going there. I still have to get in touch with PPA author. That's mostly it. I'll CC the ftp-masters reply here as soon as I get it. [0] https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/10188 [1] https://github.com/mozilla/rust/commit/25fe2cadb10db1a54cefbd1520708d4397874bc3 Cheers, Luca -- .''`. | ~[ Luca BRUNO ~ (kaeso) ]~ : :' : | Email: lucab (AT) debian.org ~ Debian Developer `. `'` | GPG Key ID: 0x3BFB9FB3 ~ Free Software supporter `-| HAM-radio callsign: IZ1WGT ~ Networking sorcerer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#689207: rust: changing back from ITP to RFP
This is an automatic email to change the status of rust back from ITP (Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug hasn't seen any activity during the last 10 months. It's a bit unfortunate that this hijack happened quite quickly, as background work on rust is ongoing. Me and Tom Lee started working upstream to iron out some bits (but it's still a long way), and Sylvestre too recently expressed interest. I'm currently trying to get libuv in sync, get it in debian and out of rust source. LLVM is going to be next big beast after that. libuv is currently stuck in NEW [0] and may not be currently usable as-is: it will be probably bundled for some time. With the fedora packager, we started noting down major issues with current rust [1]. I have an initial packaging for 0.6/0.7 available on collab-maint [2], and some monolithic binaries [3]. However I believe rust is still far from being in a releasable state for Debian and much stuff has to be discussed wrt. libraries ABI, runtime/compiler split, bootstrapping, cross-arch, etc. As a sidenote, I'm still working on both sides to get a proper package in the archive. Cheers, Luca [0] http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/libuv_0.10.8-0~exp1.html [1] https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Note-packaging [2] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=git/collab-maint/rust.git [3] http://people.debian.org/~lucab/rust/ -- .''`. | ~[ Luca BRUNO ~ (kaeso) ]~ : :' : | Email: lucab (AT) debian.org ~ Debian Developer `. `'` | GPG Key ID: 0x3BFB9FB3 ~ Free Software supporter `-| HAM-radio callsign: IZ1WGT ~ Networking sorcerer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#689207: rust: changing back from ITP to RFP
retitle 689207 RFP: rust -- a safe, concurrent, practical language noowner 689207 tag 689207 - pending thanks Hi, A long time ago, you expressed interest in packaging rust. Unfortunately, it seems that it did not happen. In Debian, we try not to keep ITP bugs open for a too long time, as it might cause other prospective maintainers to refrain from packaging the software. This is an automatic email to change the status of rust back from ITP (Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug hasn't seen any activity during the last 10 months. If you are still interested in packaging rust, please send a mail to cont...@bugs.debian.org with: retitle 689207 ITP: rust -- a safe, concurrent, practical language owner 689207 ! thanks It is also a good idea to document your progress on this ITP from time to time, by mailing 689...@bugs.debian.org. If you need guidance on how to package this software, please reply to this email, and/or contact the debian-ment...@lists.debian.org mailing list. Thank you for your interest in Debian, -- Lucas, for the QA team debian...@lists.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
