[rust-dev] RFC: Future of the Build System
irrequietus at gmail.com
Sat Jan 11 09:08:56 PST 2014
Which is why the argument of easier packaging because tool X is used by
person Y advocating it, is meaningless from both a theoretical and
practical point of view. In the end, it is just an application of graph
theory, which is widely used in dependency resolution. Another option would
be a sat solver producing the same result as for example is the case for
libzypp in openSuSE.
Again, it is a matter of combining any of these solutions with a reliable
and simple to understand format in order to produce a build system that is
consistent first, fool - proof most of the time. Surely, doing this in Rust
should be quite easily doable, given the fact that it is designed to be a
systems language. Handling entire package life cycles would be a natural
fit for a language with Rust's problem domain, even beyond the purposes of
Rust itself. Think big, then bigger.
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 1:59 PM, james <james at mansionfamily.plus.com> wrote:
> On 11/01/2014 07:56, George Makrydakis wrote:
>> There is little reason to believe that having a build system in Rust
>> would make It harder for people to package.
> Surely you just need an alternate that is a script generated as a
> from-clean dry run with -j1? It gives you the commands needed, in an order
> that works.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Rust-dev