On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 9:19 PM Josh Stone <jistone@redhat.com> wrote:
On 01/30/2017 12:11 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>     Now, that's only for Rust<->Rust.  In the case of FFI, you're actually
>     using a C ABI, and this should be fine.  Dynamic linking should be
>     preferred for both Rust making FFI calls and for Rust providing FFI for
>     other languages to call.
> Exactly, the FFI case is the one I am a bit worried about.
> It's not feasible for every package wanting to use a rust crate via a
> FFI to build (as cdylibs) and bundle the needed crates.

OK, but I'm not sure why you're worried about this.  If a crate is
providing FFI, that part should be built and shipped as a .so just like
any other rpm library.
That sounds good. Thanks for the explanation :)
I mean, we haven't formalized Rust packaging yet, but this will need to
be part of it.  We're talking about source-based devel packages for
general Rust libraries, statically linked, but FFI should be treated
like any other provided library in Fedora.
I understand. I was just reminded of just how awkward golang packaging can be ...