From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms1.migadu.com with LMTPS id kFcxFAQEUmanIAAAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 25 May 2024 17:30:12 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:58f0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id kFcxFAQEUmanIAAAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 25 May 2024 17:30:12 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=disroot.org header.s=mail header.b=j7iN3kMs; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=disroot.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1716651012; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=EYTtqJdarg0cJHeycPVwZ7hJdSLSrtZbxMZyeIOZslQ=; b=nTuUZJ12AcQBVcYZQIuGt4fzsZyT/bcQDAtHoB1fnGnZmzdEj31ORTqYAGso2xVKZLWKBO 30cHswRCN/G7roNTCkqSIjQkRXp9d6uYKTVlaceZjdBs/VwNpZsvKmujQQkcMsQrX3ije5 EYhgq71BV+d9S761aitYfoVqDtqG92CyGG2kNjj++oqvGf3z0PrFcQ0N81qcYMVgm/oO+f zZ3296NAWc2fJ6y3kLEu+LdYA9QOHSNIobe3xuDhLYJh9V9b3QjuGFP0AjX/aopR6tR7b9 PiBSRvfRZj+ZVNqFqiN6KRYfjeL8nIeQG7VCJU36AdR2+ol2aZfs5XnYQNvfEw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1716651012; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Zg8F8BavusEtjwpbJ0TbPhAf/lhnrydVGFSCx4w+17t40wNaUAarQv6he4W5s8+qLcxApY ExwArOhjb8PFP7yraq2MhznkJZpwZJdHE0Lg3XlXWtGnofXZIZ/nN0vH7arfWNjj9+sBzQ B+G+iR0kgGRq8U5SWf7N7amsauND8g+7KkOQO8br87VejGOMVY0fJ17LVenIRVN9Ya8BYU e86y1gsJCDbrFV2xJ2AREsaRIGp164SGDuGms93HuaSRrwcpEHOSGvEoQV1czFq36cr2pQ H8l3s9Q+R01JabdZb9nDDjeQmwyvesm6Ywcag8M4x2u1iysbPPOVpJMfUTPvGw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=disroot.org header.s=mail header.b=j7iN3kMs; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=disroot.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D9DB3ED0E for ; Sat, 25 May 2024 17:30:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sAtL2-0007FM-2i; Sat, 25 May 2024 11:29:40 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sATkU-0004A2-E0 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2024 08:10:14 -0400 Received: from layka.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sATkR-0006ha-K6 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2024 08:10:14 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org Mime-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail; t=1716552605; bh=EYTtqJdarg0cJHeycPVwZ7hJdSLSrtZbxMZyeIOZslQ=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=j7iN3kMskBJg0T2SYOgtUDGhDhldv7jYNQUoaM9/OL4+v5Frteb2XwPZpWuZ16ewP l+3l+HpwJG3PWlNQrZwxSR33k/Stvw7zuMteNaGSQAC/CmZThI5uyaSkGood/9mhlI 7VIdoi9vtloSlieonGB7WDBabyUJbbxjqKajQQM232BT1KheA1cvBVDIa17U6LLVmk cGibsAaMdiUnTq3apAfLKmH3cfz2e2WA+0ihpQnleKqadRKjx3RfsjUuUij7k4/Fd2 cpy1N6oE1t3O/RsV9sYC7VtBatjKcbZu8Udu/KYuBFZQxRnBZudO/qX5zlKSt2MGtV +jqNX31LkYHIw== Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 09:10:01 -0300 Message-Id: From: "Murilo" To: "MSavoritias" , Subject: Re: Idea for packaging rust apps References: <2d322c0e-4f82-1b3d-0af8-88f8980f34a6@fannys.me> In-Reply-To: <2d322c0e-4f82-1b3d-0af8-88f8980f34a6@fannys.me> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.21.23.139; envelope-from=murilo@disroot.org; helo=layka.disroot.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 25 May 2024 11:29:34 -0400 X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.70 X-Spam-Score: -4.70 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 2D9DB3ED0E X-Migadu-Scanner: mx11.migadu.com X-TUID: 5P6maBv0rJCC Hi MSavoritias, > I wanted to ask, are you also aware of the antioxidant effort?=20 > https://notabug.org/maximed/cargoless-rust-experiments I was not aware of it at all, thank you for enlightening me about the=20 effort. > I was wondering of the differences since your build system seems to=20 > still be using cargo under the hood instead of rustc. Yes, you are correct. It really does nothing special except making=20 packaging of rust apps for the end user extremely easy. This approach=20 still uses the cargo-build-system, it is not a replacement for it,=20 thus carrying all the cargo (and cargo-build-system) flaws along with=20 it. The antioxidant-build-system, on the other hand, aims to mainly solve=20 the inefficiencies of the cargo-build-system and cargo itself. After=20 looking at some mail exchange on the antioxidant effort, it will be=20 hopefully much nicer to make rust packages once the rust-build-system=20 is merged, and it will be a much better approach for Guix than what I=20 am currently suggesting. I believe my approach with cargo2guix and transitively generating guix=20 package definitions from Cargo.lock will mainly target user's Guix=20 channels because of the simplicity of the packaging process. While it=20 is better than what we currently have on Guix, it is nowhere ideal for=20 Guix as the antioxidant effort is, because of CI and the amount of=20 packages Guix has. Thank you once again for making me aware of antioxidant and the future=20 rust overhaul on Guix. -- Best regards, Murilo