[bug#32834] [PATCH] gnu: icecat: Build with rust-1.24.

[Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>]

Nils Gillmann <ng0@n0.is> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès transcribed 1.2K bytes:
>> Nils Gillmann <ng0@n0.is> skribis:
>> 
>> > Efraim Flashner transcribed 782 bytes:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> On September 29, 2018 9:55:36 PM UTC, ludo@gnu.org wrote:
>> >> >Hi Efraim,
>> >> >
>> >> >Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:
>> >> >
>> >> >> * gnu/packages/gnuzilla.scm (icecat)[native-inputs]: Use the oldest
>> >> >> compatable rust over newer releases when building icecat.
>> >> >
>> >> >[...]
>> >> >
>> >> >> +      ;; Icecat 60 checkes for rust>=1.24
>> >> >> +     `(("rust" ,rust-1.24)
>> >> >> +       ("cargo" ,rust-1.24 "cargo")
>> >> >
>> >> >I suppose the goal is to reduce the build chain, right?
>> >> 
>> >> Right. Currently each round of rust takes about 12 hours on my
>> >> fast aarch64 board. This built successfully on aarch64 and ng0
>> >> was able to build and test it on x86_64.
>> >
>> > It is convenient (less than 36 hours build, build only one version of
>> > rust), but I have to second the doubt about CVEs.
>> > Mark, have you considered asking Mozilla about their recommended
>> > strategy wrt chosing the right rust for a Firefox-based browser
>> > building and implications of using an older rust for crates already
>> > in Firefox?
>> 
>> I suspect Mozilla is not paying attention to bootstrapping issues the
>> way we do, so they’d probably recommend just using the latest Rust
>> version.
>> 
>> Ludo’.
>
> Turns out they have it documented: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Rust_Update_Policy_for_Firefox
> for 60:
> Firefox Version Requires        Rust release date       Firefox release date
> Firefox 60      Rust 1.24.0     2018 February 15        2018 May 9

I'm okay with switching our IceCat package to use rust-1.24.

     Thanks,
       Mark