Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:24:16 +0100 From: Jamie Landeg-Jones <jamie@catflap.org> To: void@f-m.fm, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: holding rust at a particular version Message-ID: <202404161424.43GEOGpa049026@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> In-Reply-To: <Zh6BiNsYvd_T5EVx@int21h> References: <Zh0srdWHPh9JlW8p@int21h> <Zh1dN-TT3iUVUsj1@over-yonder.net> <Zh1eNMWjIAPDkljJ@int21h> <202404160319.43G3JYV4025119@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> <Zh6BiNsYvd_T5EVx@int21h>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
void <void@f-m.fm> wrote: > The entire exercise is to get round having to build latest rust > locally on a weak system. Rust is a special case because it won't > build under qemu. rust on arm64 pkg servers is 1.76 but in > ports it's 1.77. Yeah, similar reason here. I know it's "buyer beware", but it's a risk I'm willing to take on my small arm boxes. > >On my slower machines I less care about, I have a script that automatically > >sets the DEFAULT_VERSIONS for various things (in a file /var/run/port-default.versions.mk > >that is loaded by make.conf) to the latest currently installed version - but > >only if that version is still a valid port in the ports tree. > > > >It's here if you're interested: https://www.catflap.org/jamie/freebsd/ > > The DEFAULT_VERSIONS for rust in /var/run/port-default.versions.mk > are either rust or rust-nightly. I can't see how the version can be held > to a numeric value here. Yes, sorry, the DEFAULT_VERSIONS thing I mentioned was referring to the more general issue with other ports, and not the issue you're having with rust. For rust, stick with the CARGO_BUILDDEP mentioned earlier. See /usr/ports/Mk/Uses/cargo.mk for more info! > > thanks for everything. your link looks interesting. Cheers, feedback welcome!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202404161424.43GEOGpa049026>