On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 03:33:35PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 9:51 AM Michael J Gruber <mjg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > So you're saying that those packages are in the repos for everyone but > > not meant to be installed by anyone (besides mock chroots), and that is > > how and why they are packaged. > > Yes. That is the best we can do given how cargo + Rust work. > > > `This package contains library source intended for building other packages which > > use the "xyz" crate.` > > So the description matches what I said? > > > Unless you `fedpkg local` build it. Or maybe only if you `fedpkg > > mockbuild` it. Does a rebuild from `fedpkg srpm` even work? > > > > Wow! > > Sorry to burst your bubble, but "fedpkg local" is an ugly hack > (independent of Rust peculiarities). fedpkg local works fine for almost all cases. > And I am not interested in adding workarounds to the Rust packaging > toolchain to support it. > > "fedpkg mockbuild" and "fedpkg srpm" all work as expected ... > > > Is there any other set of packages which we package like that? > > Probably golang ... maybe Haskell, OCaml? OCaml is definitely _not_ packaged like this. ocaml-* and ocaml-*-devel packages are normal packages that can be installed by end users if they want, although usually only if they're developing OCaml software. Rich. > > If that is how you do things for the rust eco-system, those "devel" > > packages should be clearly distinguished from real development packages, > > come with a huge boiler plate "do not install" - or, really, be in a > > separate repo if installing them is both worthless and misleading for > > any "real" user. CRB for Fedora material. > > You just pasted the package description above. What more do you want? > It clearly states that the purpose of the packages is to build other packages. > > Also, Fedora won't do split repos (been there, done that), and stuff > like it doesn't even work that well in RHEL (and causes all sorts of > issues). > > While I agree that the situation is not ideal, I still think this is > the best that we can do: > > 1. We don't want Rust applications to vendor their dependencies > 2. Rust can only do static linking (for now) > -> Dependencies can only be shipped as source code, not as compiled artifacts. > > And while you *can* use packaged Rust crates for local development if > you really want, it's not really a supported use case. > > Fabio > -- > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com nbdkit - Flexible, fast NBD server with plugins https://gitlab.com/nbdkit/nbdkit -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
