On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 15:20, Gard Spreemann <gspr@nonempty.org> wrote:
Hello team, A package I maintain [1], recently released its first version after being rewritten in Rust [2]. It's an executable binary, not a library. I'm happy to see that upstream has kept the set of dependencies small and manageable. One item is, however, missing in Debian still: ash [3]. Is ash something the Rust team has considered packaging? I've only had a cursory look, and it doesn't look too bad. Maybe I'm missing something. I'm happy to help out, but I'm very unfamiliar with the style of packaging the team uses. PS: The Rust packaging policy seems useful, but mostly focused on library crates. Are there any particular caveats or considerations I should keep in mind when moving ahead with this exectuable-only crate? [1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/waypipe [2] https://mstoeckl.com/notes/code/waypipe_to_rust.html [3] https://lib.rs/crates/ash
Hi Gard,ash seems pretty straightforward to package. You'd need to look to get it build with debians' vulkan headers since upstream unfortunately tend to vendor it in packages like this. For packaging ash, I can recommend reading the rust team book: [0]
This should get you familiarized with the teams' workflow.For waypipe itself I'd recommend using the wrapper script in d/rules and otherwise packaging it like a regular source package (see [1] for inspiration).
Hope this helps.Feel free to reach out here or on #debian-rust in case you have any more questions.
best, werdahias [0]: https://rust-team.pages.debian.net/book/ [1]: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/tex-fmt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature