Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Oct 2024 17:59:00 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        riscv@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 281600] lang/rust failing to build on risc-v (again)
Message-ID:  <bug-281600-40250-VQv2bCnwmj@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-281600-40250@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-281600-40250@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D281600

Mitchell Horne <mhorne@freebsd.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|rust@FreeBSD.org            |mhorne@freebsd.org
                 CC|                            |mhorne@freebsd.org
             Status|Open                        |In Progress

--- Comment #25 from Mitchell Horne <mhorne@freebsd.org> ---
Hi all,

I have been following this bug, and the larger issue of Rust on
FreeBSD/riscv64, for a long time now. The desires for better defaults here =
are
heard.

I am in contact with Alan Somers (asomers@) who is in-the-know on the
transition away from FreeBSD 11 syscalls within the rust project. Essential=
ly,
we are closer than ever, but the rust developers are hesitant to make the
switch officially, due to concerns/lack of confidence about backwards
compatibility, and a couple of smaller TODOs. Thus, there is still no firm
timeline for the transition.

He suggested that in the meantime, we would be able to switch to the FreeBS=
D 12
ABI by default for the riscv64 target specifically. I am working with him to
test this, and if this solution proves workable in the near-term, our probl=
em
will be solved.

If this course of action doesn't work out by the end of this year, I will
enable COMPAT11 in GENERIC as a stop-gap. At the point that Rust has offici=
ally
moved off of the FreeBSD 11 interfaces, the compatibility will be removed a=
nd
users will be required to upgrade their ports.

The discussion has repeated in circles for years now, and it is tiring to s=
ee.
We need to take some kind of step forward. What we are talking about is a
triply-niche platform: an alternative programming language, on an alternati=
ve
operating system, on an emerging CPU architecture. In other words, we are v=
ery
much the small fish in this scenario. Robert is absolutely correct that by
taking such a hard-line stance towards Rust's technical inadequacies,
legitimate as they may be, _we_ are the ones who are losing in practical te=
rms.

In the same vein, those of you who are interested and willing to experiment
with such an unofficial and immature platform as Rust on FreeBSD/riscv are
expected to carry your weight in terms of workarounds, dealing with stumbli=
ng
blocks, unclear instructions, etc. This means in the immediate-term you will
have to be comfortable with maintaining a custom kernel config adding COMPA=
T11,
if you want to experiment with Rust. For the three or four people that make=
 up
this group, this is not an unreasonable ask at all.

To reiterate: I intend to take action to get us "unstuck" here, in the
near-term, but not immediately. It is important that we continue to improve=
 the
out-of-the-box experience, but our pool of users is tiny and the pool of
developers is minuscule.

As a final request: please, do not post any more console output to this bug,
unless it is requested specifically. You can share successes/challenges
relating to building/running Rust ports on the freebsd-riscv mailing list.

Thanks.=20
Mitchell

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-281600-40250-VQv2bCnwmj>