Skip to content

Rust binaries update #53

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
lilianmoraru opened this issue Aug 31, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Rust binaries update #53

lilianmoraru opened this issue Aug 31, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@lilianmoraru
Copy link

The Rust version in rust/repositories.bzl seems a bit old.
Would you guys please consider updating to Rust 1.20+(it seems that the archive is stored on Google's storage).
Besides the features that were released meanwhile(before the 1.20 release), 1.20 has some important things like:

  • @pcwalton(Servo team) finished up the stack probes support in LLVM(for x86/x86_64) and the Rust support for them landed in 1.20 - this prevents stack overflows from going outside the application's memory.
  • -Z relro-level=[full,partial,off] - again, for security-aware software.
@mfarrugi
Copy link
Collaborator

mfarrugi commented Nov 3, 2017

#56 is open to update, but it would also be good to make this pluggable. Has this already been thought about?

@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented Nov 6, 2017

These can definitely be merged to update the default, but the point of the new toolchains system in Bazel is that you can define your own toolchain, with the new Rust release, and use that instead of the ones provided in the rules by default. You just need to copy the relevant rust_toolchain and toolchain rules, and instead of calling rust_repositories() in your WORKSPACE, call register_toolchains with the toolchains you've defined.

I'll assign #56 to myself and get it merged, however.

@mfarrugi
Copy link
Collaborator

mfarrugi commented Nov 6, 2017

Just to be clear, pasting repositories.bzl and updating parameters is the best way to do this?

@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented Nov 6, 2017

Yes, that should be fine.

@katre
Copy link
Member

katre commented Nov 6, 2017

PR #56 is merged, so I am also closing this issue.

@katre katre closed this as completed Nov 6, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants