| 28 Jun 2025 |
 dramforever | i don't think the wrapper as it is today knows about --target | 07:48:57 |
| dramforever | do we somehow add parsing for it? | 07:49:02 |
 Alyssa Ross | I thought it did | 08:00:43 |
 emily | In reply to @dramforever:matrix.org
is that cargo really wants to use the same rustc for building build.rs and proc macros as the one for building for target there's a specific cargo variable controlling some of this curse | 08:26:23 |
| emily | or well | 08:27:01 |
| emily | just see the note about targets in https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/config.html#buildrustflags | 08:27:08 |
| emily | dunno if relevant to you or not, but a source of headaches for cross if one does not understand it | 08:27:22 |
| dramforever | yeah doing it through cargo should be fine | 11:41:19 |
| dramforever | the idk two? packages using nixpkgs and compiling rust with just rustc can deal with it themselevs | 11:41:58 |
| dramforever | * the idk two? packages using nixpkgs and compiling rust with just rustc can deal with it themselves | 11:42:01 |
| dramforever | although i wonder if it means we will have cargo and rustc with frame pointers enabled or not | 11:42:20 |
| emily | In reply to @dramforever:matrix.org
we should probably do #399014 for rust. problem: how do we check for target is not x86(-32)? oh I missed the context here. is it worth checking? | 13:26:02 |
| emily | our i686 support is entirely to run Steam and Wine | 13:26:11 |
| emily | I'm not sure we have any Rust in there at all. maybe via Mesa? | 13:26:22 |
| dramforever | as fellow #exotic:nixos.org enjoyer i would rather not have to assume that | 13:27:08 |
| dramforever | * as a fellow #exotic:nixos.org enjoyer i would rather not have to assume that | 13:27:14 |
| dramforever | for anything, really | 13:27:27 |
| emily | it doesn't actually break anything, right? | 13:27:59 |
| dramforever | the way that pr went with a kludge to carve out x86-32 is not ideal but at least i can say it's just dependent on targetPlatform | 13:28:01 |
| emily | it's just slower | 13:28:02 |
| dramforever | yes, it's just slower | 13:28:10 |
| emily | being able to pick our settings based on what's good for the platforms we actually support is part of why we have support tiers | 13:28:20 |
| emily | people running exotic platforms can overlay things themselves | 13:28:29 |
| emily | I don't think it's worth a platform conditional considering that setting something unconditionally is a lot simpler all around | 13:28:47 |
| dramforever | to me it's more of a "cleanliness" of the solution over what we break | 13:29:06 |
| emily | I feel break is not the right word to use :) | 13:30:12 |
| dramforever | yeah because it's not | 13:30:26 |
| dramforever | * yeah because it's not breaking anything | 13:30:29 |
| Alyssa Ross | I don't think there's any real complexity to making this conditional? | 13:30:42 |
| emily | it's also not an exotic platform in general thing but just an x86 is the most register starved ISA in history thing | 13:30:44 |
