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

Re: Moving apt (and hence bootstraps) from GnuPG to Sequioa (via gpgv-sq)



Quoting Chris Hofstaedtler (2024-11-23 04:16:29)
> * Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> [241122 18:01]:
> > > All release architectures support Rust. We should not accept
> > > release architectures without Rust support.
> > > 
> > > A minor set of ports architectures does not have Rust support
> > > yet.
> > 
> > Rust is unsupported on i386 and patched to silently assume i686
> 
> i686 is not a problem, as that's the arch baseline for our i386
> arch since bookworm.
> 
> > - see
> > DEP-3 references in this patch for discussions about that, and the patch
> > itself for a way to more loudly make reverse dependencies aware that
> > code using SSE2 *must* be compiled without optimizations on i386:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rust-wide/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/patches/2001_fail_non-sse2-x86.patch
> > 
> > Beware that Rust team build routines run tests without optimizations,
> > regardless of DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noopt, so for libraries maintained by
> > them the issue may go unnoticed until reverse dependencies run into the
> > issue *and* test for it, otherwise it might go unnoticed until users
> > report it.
> 
> So maybe it's time to raise the baseline to i686+sse2.

As I understand the situation with Rust, it is *not* that compiled code
fails to run on old non-SSE2 hardware.  Instead, the problem is that the
Rust compiler produces code that is *ALWAYS* broken regardless if target
hardware supports SSE2 or not.

Yes, your final remark is a "solution" regardless, I just wanted to
emphasize that the problem affects the whole architecture, not only
outdated parts of it.

...unless I have misunderstand the situation, obciously.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: