[pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/1] Better explain the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration

[pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/1] Better explain the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration

[Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu]

This patches adds some explanations about the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration.
While this is not necessary if the Debian rustc package is used, it makes sense in case a newer / beta / nightly
compiler should be used for testing. The current documentation was worded in such a way that it sounded
as if rustup should always be set, which is not necessary unless additional compilers have to be used.

This patch replaces "[PATCH proxmox-backup] Remove mentioning rustup in README.rst because it's no longer needed"
as discussed here: https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/2024-December/012105.html

Signed-off-by: Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu <l.leahu-vladucu@proxmox.com>
---
 README.rst | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst
index 0caa9874..81957533 100644
--- a/README.rst
+++ b/README.rst
@@ -5,8 +5,10 @@ Build & Release Notes
 ``rustup`` Toolchain
 ====================
 
-We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package. To do that
-you can set the following ``rustup`` configuration:
+We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package (see below). If you still want to
+use ``rustup`` for other reasons (e.g. to easily switch between the official
+stable, beta, and nightly compilers), you should set the following ``rustup`` configuration
+to use the Debian-provided ``rustc`` compiler by default:
 
     # rustup toolchain link system /usr
     # rustup default system
-- 
2.39.5


_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel

Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/1] Better explain the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration

[Shannon Sterz]

On Mon Dec 16, 2024 at 12:01 PM CET, Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu wrote:
> This patches adds some explanations about the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration.
> While this is not necessary if the Debian rustc package is used, it makes sense in case a newer / beta / nightly
> compiler should be used for testing. The current documentation was worded in such a way that it sounded
> as if rustup should always be set, which is not necessary unless additional compilers have to be used.
>
> This patch replaces "[PATCH proxmox-backup] Remove mentioning rustup in README.rst because it's no longer needed"
> as discussed here: https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/2024-December/012105.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu <l.leahu-vladucu@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  README.rst | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst
> index 0caa9874..81957533 100644
> --- a/README.rst
> +++ b/README.rst
> @@ -5,8 +5,10 @@ Build & Release Notes
>  ``rustup`` Toolchain
>  ====================
>
> -We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package. To do that
> -you can set the following ``rustup`` configuration:
> +We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package (see below). If you still want to
> +use ``rustup`` for other reasons (e.g. to easily switch between the official
> +stable, beta, and nightly compilers), you should set the following ``rustup`` configuration
> +to use the Debian-provided ``rustc`` compiler by default:
>
>      # rustup toolchain link system /usr
>      # rustup default system

hm this is now wrapped at 100 chars (as is standard for our rust source
code), but for .rst files we seem to use wrapping at 80 chars afaict.
the rest of the file is also wrapped at 80 chars (with some small
exceptions). so i think i'd prefer it if your patch stuck to the 80
chars here.



_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel

Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/1] Better explain the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration

[Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu]

On 16.12.24 12:15, Shannon Sterz wrote:
> On Mon Dec 16, 2024 at 12:01 PM CET, Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu wrote:
>> This patches adds some explanations about the situations where it makes sense to adapt the rustup configuration.
>> While this is not necessary if the Debian rustc package is used, it makes sense in case a newer / beta / nightly
>> compiler should be used for testing. The current documentation was worded in such a way that it sounded
>> as if rustup should always be set, which is not necessary unless additional compilers have to be used.
>>
>> This patch replaces "[PATCH proxmox-backup] Remove mentioning rustup in README.rst because it's no longer needed"
>> as discussed here: https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/2024-December/012105.html
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laurențiu Leahu-Vlăducu <l.leahu-vladucu@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>>   README.rst | 6 ++++--
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst
>> index 0caa9874..81957533 100644
>> --- a/README.rst
>> +++ b/README.rst
>> @@ -5,8 +5,10 @@ Build & Release Notes
>>   ``rustup`` Toolchain
>>   ====================
>>
>> -We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package. To do that
>> -you can set the following ``rustup`` configuration:
>> +We normally want to build with the ``rustc`` Debian package (see below). If you still want to
>> +use ``rustup`` for other reasons (e.g. to easily switch between the official
>> +stable, beta, and nightly compilers), you should set the following ``rustup`` configuration
>> +to use the Debian-provided ``rustc`` compiler by default:
>>
>>       # rustup toolchain link system /usr
>>       # rustup default system
> 
> hm this is now wrapped at 100 chars (as is standard for our rust source
> code), but for .rst files we seem to use wrapping at 80 chars afaict.
> the rest of the file is also wrapped at 80 chars (with some small
> exceptions). so i think i'd prefer it if your patch stuck to the 80
> chars here.
> 

You are right, thanks for the info. I have now sent a second version of 
my patch where the lines are wrapped at 80 chars.


_______________________________________________
pbs-devel mailing list
pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel