| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6780
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| alamahant wrote: | | Who is behind and lobbying for rust? |
That's an easy one: The rust developers, of course.
Mozilla has written large parts of firefox in rust, and I guess that eventually they want the whole browser in rust. Originally, rust was financed by mozilla, only, but AFAIK the developers get meanwhile money also from other companies.
The reasons mentioned by mozilla for using rust were mainly these (from my memory and with my own comments):
Rust was developed to be as efficient as C (and at least partially to be a powerful as C++) without the most severe drawback of all C/C++ type languages: That certain kind of bugs due to lack of the "built-in" memory management are impossible to make. These bugs are hard to detect, can have surprising consequences at a complete different codepath than where they occur, and can in some cases - if undetected by the developer - lead to the worst sort of exploits.
My opinion: I have enough experience with C/C++ to understand the severity of their shortcomings, and I can easily imagine how a language can avoid these problems. However, I never found the time to look at rust close enough whether it can keep its promises, so I won't give an opinion about the latter.
Google was never involved with rust. Some people consider it a weakness that chromium is essentially written in the (unsafe compared to rust) C++ language. It still works well since the code is well-maintained, but there is always the underlying danger due to the inherently insecure language.
| Quote: | | Is it a politics game? |
It depends how you interpret the term "politics": In every project, the decision for a certain language has political aspects.
| Quote: | | Or just that rust is a fantastic miracle language? |
The language certainly has some advantages which make programming safer. And the fact that large parts of a browser are written in it, proves that the language is still reasonably powerful and fast. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
axl
Veteran
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1146
Location: Romania
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've read the entire thread, and it was entertaining 
I would like to add to the conversation the possibility to use zram as a block device for portage to build on. ramfs and tmpfs are nice, but wasteful. zram with zstd does wonders. That's how a normal pi4 can compile gcc easily (with zram). A pi4 with 8 gigs can build chromium. with zram.
And the second thing I wanted to add, I am hoping rustc will soon be integrated in distcc. I mean... it should work... right? I didn't try, but I think it should work. So that will certainly help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GDH-gentoo
Veteran
Joined: 20 Jul 2019
Posts: 1652
Location: South America
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | Attacking some upstream for not providing resources to your favorite toy project is not how open software works. |
Criticizing a software project's design decisions is attacking its developers?
| mv wrote: | | Quote: | | The requirement to install Rust before you can build it is just obnoxious. |
It is the same for most low-level languages: You need a compiler for the language in order to build the compiler. |
Having a stage 1 compiler written in C or C++, that is capable of compiling a stage 2 rustc written in Rust, that can then compile istelf and the rest of the package, kind of like what GCC's build system does, is difficult or impossible?
| mv wrote: | | Quote: | | The use of a bundled LLVM bloats the whole process significantly, and also could have been avoided with a good Rust->C translator. |
Similarly as above, they could have used a lot of resources to upstream the extensions to llvm they obviously need. You are free to upstream them and submit patches to the build system. |
Is this a defense of bundling practices? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Willy
Guru
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Posts: 547
Location: NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| axl wrote: | | I would like to add to the conversation the possibility to use zram as a block device for portage to build on. ramfs and tmpfs are nice, but wasteful. zram with zstd does wonders. That's how a normal pi4 can compile gcc easily (with zram). A pi4 with 8 gigs can build chromium. with zram. |
That's a cool tip, thanks
_________________
gentoo repos: kakoune | oil | hyper-v |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alamahant
Advocate
Joined: 23 Mar 2019
Posts: 3914
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thumbs up and many thanks to @axl for his suggestions about zram......
I knew nothing about that........
And now........:
| Code: |
mount | grep portage
/dev/zram0 on /var/tmp/portage type ext4 (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,discard)
|
I will test it now...
Please allow me a minor oh-so-slight thread hijacking to ask @axl if these options in zram-init seem ok.
| Code: |
load_on_start="yes"
unload_on_stop="yes"
num_devices="1"
type0="/var/tmp/portage"
flag1="ext4"
size0="10240"
maxs0="8"
algo0="zstd"
opts0="rw,nosuid,nodev,block_validity,discard,delalloc,barrier,user_xattr,acl"
|
Thaanksss...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6780
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GDH-gentoo wrote: | | ]Having a stage 1 compiler written in C or C++, that is capable of compiling a stage 2 rustc written in Rust, that can then compile istelf and the rest of the package, kind of like what GCC's build system does, is difficult or impossible? |
Perhaps, perhaps not. In any case, it is probably a considerable amount of work, and a startup-project like rust certainly has to think twice where to spend its resources.
My conjecture is that they had some half-baked scripts for their initial bootstrap (somehow they must have done it, originally) which were just hacked together, and nobody found reasonable time to look at them anymore: New arches were not the main agenda of firefox, certainly.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Similarly as above, they could have used a lot of resources to upstream the extensions to llvm they obviously need. You are free to upstream them and submit patches to the build system. |
Is this a defense of bundling practices? |
No, but it is probably the explanation why things are as they are. I think rust started (and probably still is) a few men project and you cannot expect them to do everything.
If you offered one of the above and they rejected (without a serious technical reason), then you could really say that the project is hostile to source-based distros. (I think that we all know some really hostile projects.)
But if you just complain that they didn't spend resources where you would want them to be spent: this is a reason to become active and do something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
axl
Veteran
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1146
Location: Romania
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| alamahant wrote: | | discard,delalloc |
I particularly like that zram devices support these 2 options. Which basically mean that when you delete something off of it, it will zero out the previously used places, thereby reducing the amount of ram required. Another thing I love about it is that it supports "threads" (multiple) to compress and decompress data. One comment though. It's not a lot of wasted space, but it's some. You don't actually need a journalized FS for this, as you are never going to remount the same temporary zram you had before. There is no "saved" state for zram. Therefor journal isn't necessary. ext2 would be a lighter version. I love zram so much, I am using it as root device on some of my systems. It's absolutely great.
anyway, about that other thing... distcc
clang HAS support for distcc. or the other way around. you can use clang with distcc. it even works with cross compiling. LLVM_TARGETS="AArch64 AMDGPU ARM BPF NVPTX PowerPC (X86)". Assuming you have a target enabled, clang WILL compile stuff. through distcc. But here is the problem. See the "aarch64" target enabled? well, there is no aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu-clang(++) link to it in /usr/bin. or in /usr/lib/distcc/bin. but if you make it manually, it starts working (assuming you push stuff from a pi or smth of the sort).
I expect rust should be the same. it has LLVM_TARGETS. at least clang creates the own ${CHOST}-clang(++). rustc is just rustc. not even x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-rustc. but assuming the links are there, and distcc knows how to read the files and send the includes, and portage knows to use distcc rustc... maybe it could become less of a burden.
at least it would be for me. the thing is, I can't expect everyone to stay in the 20th century forever. gcc ... as great of a friend it was to me, I knew one day, it would stop being the king of the hill. I knew the day came closer when they started talking about using rust code in the kernel... and linus was ok with it. yeah, it's an imposition on me too, and I dislike it, but I have NO voice in it.
there are admin tricks like zswap and zram and nfs and qemu and various other tools to make big computers do the work for smaller computers, or make smaller computers do the work themselves with a little help from a bigger computer. but in my opinion, the biggest of them all is distcc. and I would have NO problem with rust if it were to be distcc ready. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yayo wrote: | | err... I don't get it: doesn't "different distros are different" mean that Gentoo also is different from the other ones? In fact being Gentoo a "meta-distro" means it's even more "different" from all the others from the beginning on purpose. So, if rust must not follow any specific distro rules, why should Gentoo do it? : ? |
Precisely. You didn't get it. It was an example, that Rust should not follow Gentoo rules, BECAUSE! HU claimed the opposite. He was/is unhappy, that Rust doesn't behave like he wish it should behave.
Gentoo has to do nothing. That was not the point. That is exactly what you didn't get.
| yayo wrote: | | In fact I'm quite happy with Gentoo. |
Great for you, but that is also oftopic. Read on where and why that discussion has been started. I like apples. Why I don't make it public?
Again, it makes no sense to say - I like Gentoo, if you don't - don't use it. It is also not about who likes it and who doesn't.
Try to think logically. People who use and discuss Gentoo here simply cannot hate it, because they won't be using it and won't get to this forum
in the first place. Does it make sense for you?
Gentoo behaves fully correctly putting Rust as dependency of any package it depends on. The initial unhappiness has no reasons.
| yayo wrote: | | If you like it use it, if you don't change it. I don't see the point. |
Precisely again. You don't see the point. That is it. 2 options are available. You read the full thread or you leave it.
| yayo wrote: | | I think the point is if there is a way to do the things work better for Gentoo users (not to reinvent Gentoo). |
There is no contradiction. There is nothing more permanent than the change. Do things better can easily mean reinvent it.
What Daniel Robens did? - He has reinvented Gentoo! Later on what he did came back to Gentoo. May be not at 100%,
but Gentoo today and Gentoo 2004 are different distros. So yes Gentoo has been reinvented.
| yayo wrote: |
I guess there are 2 things to do?
1_ to find more choices if possible for packages coded with rust (like some exchange for librsvg? I don't even know if there is something else available...) |
Why? What the purpose? What is the goal?
Doing nothing doesn't require any justification. Doing something - does it. What are the reasons doing so?
| yayo wrote: |
2_ to fix anything else that could help to keep the system clean, like the python mess, I mean trying to keep all the packages roughly at the same version? version slots are useful but should not be abused. ._. |
You cannot. The mess is caused by Python, not by Gentoo. There is no way to repair the roof to fix the basement.
Gentoo is more or less a build system. Neither Python nor any other packages are provided by Gentoo developers.
Gentoo is not the only distro and not the most popular one. Gentoo cannot dictate what developers have to do with their packages.
My conclusion - you have to learn a lot about what is Gentoo.
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yayo
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 May 2014
Posts: 96
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think there is really a useful way to interact with you lefsha.
I could say that I find your reply offensive ("leave it"?), but I guess I would get the same reply again...?
I just wanna repeat that I like Gentoo one more time, right because you pointed out that is offtopic.
Sorry if my post was stupid (or not "logic", or useless, whatever). It was not meant to be.
Thanks for your reply. : )
Have a nice day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo
Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 2687
Location: Here and Away Again
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Split the posts up to this point off of [s] Why is the rust package being pulled in a world update?, which is more of a support question and was answered, while the rest seems to me more about something else, and deserving of its own topic.
Let me know if the title is not descriptive enough!
I see some talk about what Gentoo is here, and I tend to agree with how NeddySeagoon can often be spotted describing it (a slightly edited quote ensues): Gentoo is a toolkit you use to build your own distribution with. Gentoo is only Portage (the package manager), and the ebuild repository.
I might add all the developers, proxy maintainers, and contributors into the mix, as well as the users, of course, but these are less technical aspects of the project.
_________________
Kindest of regardses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lefsha wrote: | Try to think logically. People who use and discuss Gentoo here simply cannot hate it, because they won't be using it and won't get to this forum
in the first place. Does it make sense for you? |
Actually you have that completely backwards. Refusing to move outside one's comfort zone is a fragile emotional condition, not a logical viewpoint. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Clad in Sky wrote: | You can also make pigs fly by strapping a rocket to them.
Thing is, the usual way of installing Ubuntu is to download one of their most recent releases (LTS or non LTS) , make a bootable medium from it and install that.
The usual way of installing Gentoo is to boot a system, follow the steps in the Gentoo handbook (or if you don't need that, do it without), get a basic Gentoo running and install more packages from source as you see fit. |
I do disagree. First of all Ubuntu is not a pig with a rocket! It has been built exact the same way like Gentoo!!! I repeat precisely the same way.
Any, absolute any package (program or library) has been written in textual format i.e. - source based.
Any package is designed to be built in the certain way. Like cmake based one need cmake and so on. No distro devs are willing to redesign the way
how the package is built. The may only add some patches and slightly modify installation process, which is in most cases cary no benefits for users.
Most packages provide some flexibility for using some options. Ubuntu decides what is the best for them. Gentoo expose some (not all!) of them to end user.
By luck or coincidence the options selected by any Gentoo user can be the same like chosen by Ubuntu devs.
The main difference between Ubuntu and Gentoo is that Gentoo is offering some deviations from the standard way to build packages at Ubuntu.
And it is not being source based or not. Any distro is source based. The only difference is what we understand as a base.
People who say the opposite have no clue. And I see no point to discuss with them anything. They have to go to school first.
I will ignore those statements.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | Yes, it's hard to decide that. And because that is the case, I guess you could file a bug or something asking for a binary package for whatever package is taking too long or hogging too much memory while building. Or how long it took to build the package on the testing machines of the Gentoo devs. |
I personally didn't ask for binary packages. I just said, that people who need Rust to build something and not for development are smart if they are using rust-bin.
That should be the first (default) option IF rust-bin is available. And I said, that rust-src is not the best option if you are a Rust developer.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | The kernel is quite a different beast. If you don't choose a lot of modules, compiling the kernel doesn't take long, even on older machines. If you use genkernel which activates many modules, compiling takes longer. By the way, there is "sys-kernel/gentoo-kernel-bin". |
I see no relations between using genkernel and the number of modules installed on the system. Are there an automatic system, which best selection
of ALL options for a given user? - I am not aware of any.
I have used kernel _only as an example_, that compilation time can vary a lot depending on options selected. I don't know any other package,
where building time is varying by factor of 10+ if using different options. So again, it was only as example.
If thinking more than 5 sec one can understand, that building kernel with all options enables might take less time, than building it only with selected modules...
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | Same with the optimization you're mentioning - how could the gentoo devs decide which programm a user runs once a year for 10 minutes? |
Well, some people call it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistics
1. You collect data.
2. You analyse that data.
3. You make your conclusion.
I am not sure, whether a specific tool for that is existing, but that would be a great experiment.
Once in 5-10 min collect data for CPU usage for each application and put them into a DB.
After a year check the statistics. Compare it with CPU time required to build each corresponding package.
If getting statistics from each Gentoo user, it can be possible to understand what programs are used most
and what not. For each package the time frame between updates need to be considered.
Let say A has used 60 min time for compilation and 10 min during the 1 week time till the next update.
Obviously it's waste of time optimizing A to the limit or provide less frequent updates.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | What makes sense, though? |
Time*money parameter as criteria for doing things one or another way.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | Does it make sense to choose Gentoo in the first place? For many people probably not. |
Absolutely! Frankly speaking Gentoo community need learn about its users. Why they use it and what for.
Studying that will help to understand who is that average user and optimize the distro for them.
I do have hard time to understand why people using Gentoo for desktop. For gaming probably yes.
There are no distros for servers. At least I am not aware of any. All modern distro include everything
including xorg or other things which are not required for server. Linux is now more like Windows.
1. First use case for me - Gentoo as server. It's quite similar with what D. Robbins is doing.
2. Second use case is machine or cluster for scientific calculations, where each CPU takt matters.
These 2 use cases are obvious for me. Anything else is very questionable IMHO.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | And that is your opinion. That's OK. However, Gentoo is a source based distro, so not providing a source for a package that is not closed source is not the Gentoo way.
Gentoo was started with the purpose of being a source based meta distribution that leaves as much freedom as possible to the person building the system.
I'm quoting the www.gentoo.org welcome message here:
"Welcome to Gentoo, a highly flexible, source-based Linux distribution."
While I won't deny that in the majority of cases providing rustup/ binary rust could suffice, that would be against the aspect of "highly flexible", not to mention "source based". Moreover, looking up "rustup gentoo" lists possible solutions, so if you need it on gentoo, you can use it. Flexible, innit? |
I do still remember the Unix concept. Everything is a file. Well almost everything, but something else could be a socket.
Well that is also not enough. There are some beast which doesn't fit into that concept. It was many years ago.
I guess modern people have learned, that trying to squeeze a substance into a frame may be difficult.
A simple example AppImage or Docker container. You cannot represent them as source based ebuild, although they all
are made of sources. If people would disagree with what Gentoo is providing, they will either build/download their own
packages or leave Gentoo in favor of something else.
Well, why going that far. Kernel is not represented as ebuild. It can't be built by "emerge kernel".
So why do you insist rust has to be provided as ebuild, but kernel not?
Is it possible to write ebuild for kernel? Probably yes. It will be a lot of work, but it could be done.
Instead Gentoo is providing kernel-bin package without corresponding kernel-src one.
Don't mix gentoo-sources with above. gentoo-sources is just extracting archive into a path.
tar xvf or similar can do the same. No ebuild is required.
No one is crying about it. Why native rust should be a trouble?
Gentoo is not providing anything special beyond what is provided by rust community.
The opposite is true. Gentoo Rust is not complete version of Rust.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | Another opinion. I could argue that I profit from it. Why would you want to take that away from me? |
Me? No way. Did I ever said that? Tell me where?
I have only said, that rust-bin should have 1st priority if user is not asking for anything special.
Any one who wish to use source based on can do that. It is very hard in Linux world to forbid
source based installation if sources are available for free.
The OP has put a valid concern on the table. Why he or she have to spend hours in Rust compilation, if he or she doesn't need it.
If you personally need it - no one can stop you from doing that.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | I wish I were on Gentoo, because then I'd probably have all the tools for building with their dependencies. |
Your concern is to have most recent package versions. Well, then you have to use Arch Linux. Gentoo is far behind.
I can't see why it is good or necessary, but you have missed your target.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | No, not really. It's the Gentoo philosophy. Remember, Gentoo is a source based distro. So whatever source it is possible to provide, it provides. |
I have demonstrated, that this philosophy doesn't work always.
1. Not all packages are provided as source based. Not all can be provided that way easily.
2. Gentoo doesn't have most recent packages among all distros.
3. Gentoo doesn't provide MANY packages, which are available in other (binary based) distros.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | No, because they're not. |
Absolutely everything is source based, without exclusion. If you wish to deny it you have easy task
to provide a single binary only package.
Of course, we don't consider video, pictures, music drawings and the like as valid package content.
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | Gentoo usually does provide each version - old versions are removed from the tree after some time, and not every version goes to stable, though. I think you can even still get old ebuilds if you really need/ want them, they're just not in the spotlight anymore. |
It is not about old-new. It's about that some versions are skipped. Even not all kernel versions are available!
There are 5.4 and 5.7, but 5.5 and 5.6 are absent. Not only kernel is affected. Again, many other packages too.
You just didn't pay attention.
I am not saying it is bad. I am saying the same strategy can be extended!
| Clad in Sky wrote: | | I'd be really interested, why are YOU using Gentoo. What's in it for you, when you don't seem to be in favour of the source based philosophy? You could use any of the binary distros that also offer a lot of flexibility like Arch and derivatives? |
I put my reasons above. May be LFS is alternative, but long ago I came from FreeBSD world. Its also where Gentoo came from...
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony0945
Watchman
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 5127
Location: Illinois, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yayo wrote: | I don't think there is really a useful way to interact with you lefsha.
I could say that I find your reply offensive ("leave it"?), but I guess I would get the same reply again...?
I just wanna repeat that I like Gentoo one more time, right because you pointed out that is offtopic.
Sorry if my post was stupid (or not "logic", or useless, whatever). It was not meant to be.
Thanks for your reply. : )
Have a nice day. |
Offensive? I was not offering or suggesting you leaving anything. Not at all.
I was protecting Gentoo strategy where it is right. And I was suggesting how Gentoo could
be better to avoid unhappy people like OP in the original thread, because he/she is also right.
Instead you come to the thread and saying - "I like Gentoo"
How it is related to the topic?
Feel free to argue on anything what has been said. You may blame me as much as you can.
I am asking only for 1 thing - an argument.
People tend to say - it's all bullshit what you are saying, but they frequently forget to add - because...
I am explaining my position with a lot of text and a lot of examples, that other people
or companies do the same. I hope I have earned - arguments from anyone
who is joining the discussion.
Am I wrong?
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | lefsha wrote: | Try to think logically. People who use and discuss Gentoo here simply cannot hate it, because they won't be using it and won't get to this forum
in the first place. Does it make sense for you? |
Actually you have that completely backwards. Refusing to move outside one's comfort zone is a fragile emotional condition, not a logical viewpoint. |
Don't really understand this one.
Ok. I am saying, that people here are interested in Gentoo and highly likely are using it.
Where I am wrong?
Do you mean, that people hate Gentoo AND use it, because they have problem to leave it?
Well, that should be a disorder. I can't see any sense in that.
I have used Arch for many years. After its transition to systemd I came back to Gentoo.
There are many people who are moving from one distro to another.
There is no ideal distro. Not that I know. People who 100% happy with any distro
most probably don't know it. Everything in the world has advantages and disadvantages.
Well, I admit again. I didn't get your message.
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
axl
Veteran
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 1146
Location: Romania
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chiitoo wrote: | | what Gentoo is |
gentoo devs dont know either. I could quote gorny saying like... what was it? he proposed like last week to change the foundation with something else. I am not comfortable to use the same term. it will be badly interpreted. the original thread is called: gentoo council vs umbrela corp. started by gorny. they don't know either.
i think us users put so much pressure on them, they just caved at some point. some of them. rest are soon to follow. it's not a good thing.
gentoo devs should be fed milk and honey and have a steady diet of sex.
its no wonder, for me at least, some people are unhappy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alamahant
Advocate
Joined: 23 Mar 2019
Posts: 3914
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
@lefsha.
I think that the essence of your posts in this thread is that virtual/rust should have given precedence to rust-bin than rust.
I agree with you.
But I am grateful to Gentoo maintainers for providing rust-bin and many other binaries like firefox and google-chrome.
I love Gentoo because it is FUN.
That being said I will not tolerate long compiling packages like browsers or rust in this case which is being pulled by another package because some upstream developer had a wet dream and fell in love with the beauty and greatness of rust.
I couldnt care less about rust.
It is only a means to a goal.
Having said all these I feel maybe your need to comprehensively put every poster of this thread back to his place shows that maybe you are narcissistic about the brilliance of your intellect and reasoning...
Just I was curious...
Are you a fan of rust?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GDH-gentoo wrote: | | mv wrote: | | Attacking some upstream for not providing resources to your favorite toy project is not how open software works. |
Criticizing a software project's design decisions is attacking its developers? |
Not at all, but unfortunately frequently considered as such. The modern world does not like arguing.
| GDH-gentoo wrote: | | mv wrote: | | Quote: | | The requirement to install Rust before you can build it is just obnoxious. |
It is the same for most low-level languages: You need a compiler for the language in order to build the compiler. |
Having a stage 1 compiler written in C or C++, that is capable of compiling a stage 2 rustc written in Rust, that can then compile istelf and the rest of the package, kind of like what GCC's build system does, is difficult or impossible? |
I missed that one. Rust does exactly that. rust-bin is NOT required to build rust-src.
Native rust doesn't required even to be build.
| GDH-gentoo wrote: |
| mv wrote: | | Quote: | | The use of a bundled LLVM bloats the whole process significantly, and also could have been avoided with a good Rust->C translator. |
Similarly as above, they could have used a lot of resources to upstream the extensions to llvm they obviously need. You are free to upstream them and submit patches to the build system. |
Is this a defense of bundling practices? |
Rust rely on llvm for faster development. Making a language from scratch is not easy and not fast. But they have plans to be independent.
Why expecting from people more than they can? - Its a lot of work after all.
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wuzzerd
Guru
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 467
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chiitoo wrote: | NeddySeagoon can often be spotted describing it (a slightly edited quote ensues): Gentoo is a toolkit you use to build your own distribution with. Gentoo is only Portage (the package manager), and the ebuild repository.
|
++27
That sums up why I'm here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| alamahant wrote: |
But for me,an ignorant Gentoo user,rust being forced on to us sucks. |
I guess you see the things not correctly.
1. Rust is just a language. No one is pushing you to use it.
2. You have to blame other developers who decided to use it.
Exactly the same way like you may blame any one who use
gcc or clang.
3. At the very end you have to blame yourself for selecting source based distro.
In here you are explicitly forced to install developer tools even if your only
intention is to watch some video on youtube.
Yes. Rust-bin is the solution. And it should be the default one.
But other people here blame me and repeating again and again
Gentoo is source-based distro.
I was offering a compromise, but people are not looking for them.
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6780
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lefsha wrote: | | Yes. Rust-bin is the solution. |
It is a solution which is against the idea of a source-based distribution. A real compromise IMHO would be a USE=system-bootstrap default, because this requires to download the binary only once - analogously of having to downloading a gcc binary for the very first install - and from then on bootstrap from source (unless things go completely havoc). I have no idea why the rust maintainers in gentoo decided to even mask this possibility for stable users. If I were the maintainer, I would even reverse the logic here and introduce USE=binary-bootstrap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clad in Sky
l33t
Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 889
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lefsha wrote: | | Clad in Sky wrote: | You can also make pigs fly by strapping a rocket to them.
Thing is, the usual way of installing Ubuntu is to download one of their most recent releases (LTS or non LTS) , make a bootable medium from it and install that.
The usual way of installing Gentoo is to boot a system, follow the steps in the Gentoo handbook (or if you don't need that, do it without), get a basic Gentoo running and install more packages from source as you see fit. |
I do disagree. First of all Ubuntu is not a pig with a rocket! It has been built exact the same way like Gentoo!!! I repeat precisely the same way.
Any, absolute any package (program or library) has been written in textual format i.e. - source based. |
Thanks for your replies. I can see your point and where I don't I just decided to agree that we can go on disagreeing.
I just wanted to go back to that one point that you seem to interpret differently from what I intended:
Of course Ubuntu and other distros are fundamentally source based. I expect that except for some niche cases, hardly anyone is writing machine language - and people who really have to do really low level stuff will use assembler, which also isn't machine language.
What I wanted to say is that distros like Ubuntu, Mint (well, sure, it's derived from Ubuntu), Debian and what have you are not based on the idea that the users themselves compile every package from source but use precompiled packages provided in the repositories. There are no useflags - so if you want to have, for example, only the CLI version of VLC, you either need to find that package in the repositories, or compile it yourself - for which Ubuntu does not provide a simple method like "emerge vlc". Of course you could do it, but that involves downloading the source manually, possibly checking for dependencies and installing them, and then compiling vlc with the correct options so a GUI is not built.
From what I remember, those distros do not come with a ready toolchain for compilation, so you need to set up that as well. It's possible, of course, but it's not what the creators of those distros had in mind, else they'd provide at least a toolchain.
And installing Ubuntu from the sources... sure, you can do that, probably. LFS documentation will probably help you with that. And afterwards? The update mechanisms of those distros cannot, as far as I am aware, handle updating packages that need to be compiled from source. So you'd have to either try and install portage or do it manually.
That's what I meant you can make a pig fly by strapping a rocket to it. Sure, you can get an Ubuntu up and running from source - but it's not designed that way. You're supposed to download an installation medium that comes with a graphical installer that installs binary packages.
| lefsha wrote: |
There are no distros for servers. At least I am not aware of any.
|
Aren't there server flavours of Ubuntu, Debian and others?
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alamahant
Advocate
Joined: 23 Mar 2019
Posts: 3914
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Clad in Sky
I love you invocation to Kali....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clad in Sky
l33t
Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 889
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| alamahant wrote: | Clad in Sky
I love you invocation to Kali....
|
Thanks.
While totally OT, it's from Therion's Kali Yuga III
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UKKrZMAy94
The video is a bit cheesy because Snowy Shaw was involved.
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lefsha
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 1234
Location: Burgas, Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| alamahant wrote: | | That being said I will not tolerate long compiling packages like browsers or rust in this case which is being pulled by another package because some upstream developer had a wet dream and fell in love with the beauty and greatness of rust. I couldnt care less about rust. |
Frankly, I can't agree. It is you who is using sourced-based distro. There is no one who pushed you do that.
Source-based distro presume building packages from... sources. To be able to build anything one need a compiler.
If the program is written in C or C++ you need gcc for example.
If the program is written in Rust you need... Rust. Who cares whether it is a good or a bad language?
Tell me what above makes you wonder? It can't be simpler, can it?
Gentoo provides rust-bin, but doesn't provide gcc-bin, although it could.
If you don't like Rust, which I can't explain as long as you don't write programs in Rust, then
you have 2 options. Don't use programs written in Rust or use binary distros.
_________________
Lefsha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
