On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 01:34:19PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 12:34:59PM +0200, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > > [...] > > > That's good to know. I also doubt there's much local reliance on > > > those, given how little they've been used within the main archive, and > > > I expect that anyone who is relying on them locally will be competent > > > enough to cope with this proposed (breaking) change. I would also > > > expect that any local users relying on this field would appreciate the > > > benefit of the changes proposed. > > > > CCing Stefan, who currently schedules binNMUs based on Built-Using and > > Extra-Source-Only, IIRC. not sure whether RT already acts on S-B-U > > anywhere as well, in addition to that? > > Dear Fabian, > > Thanks! I don't know about Extra-Source-Only. > > > > [...] > > > > > > If there is consensus on this, then given what you've pointed out > > > above, we should probably tighten up the wording of the proposal to > > > indicate that Static-Built-Using should only list packages whose > > > upgrading should trigger a rebuild of the package, for example > > > packages whose content is embedded in the resulting binary package. > > > But the compiler used should not generally be included in this field. > > > > note that for Rust, this is for the most part not true - except for > > niche use cases (nostd, like when building embedded things or Linux > > kernel stuff), the standard library which is part of the toolchain > > packages *is* statically linked into any Rust executable. and even for > > nostd, the same applies to a smaller standard library (libcore). > > > > so while Static-Built-using rustc could go away following this line of > > reasoning (which I do agree with - grave compiler codegen bugs warrant > > rebuilding the world anyway), libstd-rust-dev would remain. > > Ah, interesting. Would one want to/need to automatically rebuild > every Rust package every time libstd-rust-dev is updated? (I don't > know Rust anywhere near well enough to know the answer to this > question.)
yes, that is already happening in unstable (either naturally by incoming uploads, or with a slight delay via binNMUs scheduled by the release team/Sebastian :)). in unstable/main, there's currently three versions of src:rustc kept around: 1.70.0+dfsg1-9 (not sure why?) 1.85.0+dfsg2-3 (proton-caller in contrib which was not yet rebuilt it seems) 1.85.0+dfsg3-1 (the current one)
