linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Makefile: rust-analyzer target: better error handling and comments

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2024062005-subtype-collage-2c35@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:45:58 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: rust-analyzer target: better error handling
 and comments

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:31:53AM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 8:13 AM John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> wrote:
> >
> > What exactly did you have in mind for how that should look? The
> > "make rustavailable" target has some leading *** and some bare
> > statements, so I'm not quite sure exactly how to lay it out:
> 
> I was thinking something like:
> 
>     ***
>     *** Rust is not available.
>     ***
> 
> (the `***` prefix is used also in other similar scripts and by Make itself).
> 
> However, thinking about it a bit more, we should perhaps just let
> `rust_is_available.sh` tell the user why it fails, since it is likely
> the next step the user would do anyway:
> 
>     $ make LLVM=1 rust-analyzer
>     ***
>     *** Rust compiler 'rustc' is too old.
>     ***   Your version:    1.62.0
>     ***   Minimum version: 1.78.0
>     ***
>     ***
>     *** Please see Documentation/rust/quick-start.rst for details
>     *** on how to set up the Rust support.
>     ***
>     make[1]: *** [linux/Makefile:1973: rust-analyzer] Error 1
>     make: *** [Makefile:240: __sub-make] Error 2
> 
> What do you think? Then there is no need for extra output here and the
> patch becomes simpler too.

As someone who just ran into the "wait, how do I get rust to build on
this machine again?" problem, yes, having the link to the documentation
right there would be helpful.  I did know where to find it, but others
might not, and it's free to add.

thanks,

greg k-h