Hi MSavoritias, > I wanted to ask, are you also aware of the antioxidant effort? > https://notabug.org/maximed/cargoless-rust-experiments
I was not aware of it at all, thank you for enlightening me about the effort. > I was wondering of the differences since your build system seems to > still be using cargo under the hood instead of rustc. Yes, you are correct. It really does nothing special except making packaging of rust apps for the end user extremely easy. This approach still uses the cargo-build-system, it is not a replacement for it, thus carrying all the cargo (and cargo-build-system) flaws along with it. The antioxidant-build-system, on the other hand, aims to mainly solve the inefficiencies of the cargo-build-system and cargo itself. After looking at some mail exchange on the antioxidant effort, it will be hopefully much nicer to make rust packages once the rust-build-system is merged, and it will be a much better approach for Guix than what I am currently suggesting. I believe my approach with cargo2guix and transitively generating guix package definitions from Cargo.lock will mainly target user's Guix channels because of the simplicity of the packaging process. While it is better than what we currently have on Guix, it is nowhere ideal for Guix as the antioxidant effort is, because of CI and the amount of packages Guix has. Thank you once again for making me aware of antioxidant and the future rust overhaul on Guix. -- Best regards, Murilo
