Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 19:44:13 -0800 From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> To: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [Bug 251014] x11-wm/openbox Prefer graphics/ligvrsvg2-rust over graphics/librsvg2 Message-ID: <CAN6yY1uu7ibUwqn-G_SbyqfuEbvefD5cdS3iqdYB1=RW5XbpNw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <bug-251014-6497-qFEYFmqoR1@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-251014-6497@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> <bug-251014-6497-qFEYFmqoR1@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 6:18 PM <bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org> wrote: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=251014 > > Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |danfe@FreeBSD.org > > --- Comment #5 from Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> --- > (In reply to p5B2E9A8F from comment #0) > > please make graphics/librsvg2 a port option choice > Technically it is optional in Openbox, albeit enabled by default. The > problem > is more serious for ports where librsvg2 is not an optional dependency, and > thus cannot be easily turned off. > > With this patch and DEFAULT_VERSIONS+=librsvg2=legacy, I can finally build > Openbox again with default options, thank you Tobias. Prior to this > change it > was impossible because apparently this Lenovo L470 laptop of mine with 8GB > RAM > is not potent enough. > > > I could lash out for a nice rant but I'm not going to do that. > I'll just say that may it be an example of why one should *not* try to > rewrite > popular open-source C library (which can be compiled even on, I don't know, > TI-85?) in a "better" tongue that requires 100500 GB of RAM just to build > itself, not to mention it being self-hosted and thus requiring bootstrap on > every architecture. This could be tolerable for leaf ports, but really > horrible for maintaining reusable open-source components serving as > dependencies for vast variety of software. First, I suggest installing rust as a package rather than building locally. I usually do build locally, but it's not really necessary. Mixing ports and packages can be tricky, but things like llvm, gcc, and rust should not be an issue. Second, I have no problem building rust on my older/slower T520. (Same as a T420 except a 15 inch screen.) I do need to "setenv TMPDIR /some/place/with/>1G/space unless I have /tmp with access to a big chunk of storage and am not using tmpfs. The rust build also requires serious swap space (hence, not tmpfs) but I use 16GB of swap and it does not come close to running out. I suspect 8GB would be adequate. Then start it building when I won't need much from the system for about 4 hours. I think it likely that more open source projects will move to rust. I am not a real coder any longer and my best days as a programmer were mostly writing machine language long before C took over when kernels were written in macro, but I find it significantly superior to C in many respects, especially in writing secure code that does not leak memory all over the place. I suspect that rust will be simply a basic requirement for most systems that build software from source in three or four years. That said, I didn't give python much chance to really catch on back in v1 days or even in the early days of v2, so I can't claim to be a great prognosticator. -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1uu7ibUwqn-G_SbyqfuEbvefD5cdS3iqdYB1=RW5XbpNw>