[Bug 2099576] Review Request: libkrun - Dynamic library providing Virtualization-based process isolation capabilities

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099576



--- Comment #4 from Sergio Lopez <slopezpa@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #3)
> Our macro tooling for Rust doesn't support workspaces yet, because they are
> very unusual - 99% of our Rust packages are individual crates from
> crates.io, so adding workspace Support to %cargo_generate_buildrequires has
> always been low priority. However, this is not the only Fedora package that
> would benefit from adding support for workspaces: zola and
> system76-keyboard-configurator (and probably a few others as well) are
> currently working around this problem in different ways. Having official
> support in the %cargo_generate_buildrequires macro would be great, if
> somebody can contribute it :)
> 
> Same thing applies to cdylib-only crates. You can trick rust2rpm into
> working by adding an "rlib" target in addition to the cdylib target, and
> then dropping that from the patch again. There are at least two packages I
> know of that would benefit from getting this fixed (librpm-sequoia,
> sequoia-octopus-librnp). On the other hand, this is also kind of what
> cargo-c is designed to handle for you, so you could look at how rav1e gets
> built, as well.
> 
> Also note that %cargo_build and %cargo_install do set some flags for cargo
> and some RUSTFLAGS to make produced binaries comply with Fedora standards
> wrt. hardening, debuginfo, etc., so not using them is usually a bad idea.
> These two *should* work even if the other macros don't, but at the very
> least, you need to include the same cargo and RUSTFLAGS manually if you
> decide to use the Makefile, instead.

We can't use %cargo_install since it also fails attempting to read the manifest
(since it's a workspace), but I've updated the specfile to use %cargo_build by
using the Makefile just to compile "init/init.c" and calling "patchelf"
directly on %build. This way the dynamic library binary is built following
Fedora standards and we don't have to keep track of RUSTFLAGS manually.

Thanks for the feedback!


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099576
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux