On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 07:11:47AM +0200, Pjotr Prins wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 05:56:52PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > Am Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 09:33:31AM +0000 schrieb pukkamustard:
> > > A hunch: This might have something to do with Zig not properly
> > > supporting glibc 2.35: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/12808
> > 
> > Thanks, this looks like a good explanation of the problem, but I do not
> > quite see what could be a solution... I see a string of issues of the form
> > "add support for targeting glibc ..."
> >    https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/12808
> >    https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/12809
> >    https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/14798
> > but all of them are open.
> > 
> > We may have to do without zig in the foreseeable future...
> > 
> 
> They just added a tag for the next release. We can wait.

We may have to backport whatever fix they do, it looks like 0.11 is
going to use their new bootstrap chain, with a pre-compiled zig wasm
binary.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted