A similar problem afflicts other software in Debian stable; Rust is not unique. The reasonable solution is to stop using Debian stable if you want updates.
use std::arch::asm;
fn main() {
unsafe {
asm!(
"syscall",
in("eax") 60,
in("edi") 0,
out("rcx") _,
out("r11") _,
}
}
I'm not entirely happy how Mozilla forced Debian's hand here. But it means that there is a relatively current, Debian-blessed Rust compiler, and you can use it for your own builds if you are willing to upgrade from time to time.
Edit: Reworded to remove disagreement.
> the ecosystem (crates on cargo.io) move to use the latest features so quickly
They use the new features in new software -- implying he wants to use that new software. If he uses the old versions that predate the new features, this wouldn't be a problem for him.
If you want Debian to curate your compiler version, then use the Debian curated versions of your Rust software for compatibility.
And it's hardly every Rust thread. There are far too many rust threads to even count, let alone comment on.
Seems empirically false https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/rust/
If your distro is unwilling to update a package with a single backwards-compatible minor version bump every 6 weeks, that’s a cultural issue, not a technical one. The “stability“ Debian imagines it gets from shipping a years-old compiler version instead of keeping up-to-date with non-breaking compiler updates is entirely mythical.
Pick a less sclerotic distro next time.
what? why? someone has to click the approve on the update+build+publish pipeline.. and that's in most repos anyway.
and you don't want to create & distribute a new OS image for every security update, right?
... anyway, the whole problem is that only upstream can provide these kind of security updates. it's a big (and very very convenient) lie what stable distros are doing, but many times packages have to work their asses off to maintain this illusion. (when they have to patch/backport/hack packages.)
Rust as language and compiler provides the tools for this (stability guarantee, editions, etc), but the various devs that provide Rust crates might not.
sure, if Rust would artificially hold back new features that would definitely provide this "stability", but it's no wonder devs adopt new features fast. because they want them, it makes their life easier, and it usually makes users happier too.
what the Rust ecosystem is doing (and NodeJS and TypeScript and quite a few high-velocity newish ones) is providing updates to users faster.
of course there are some users that might not care about this, hence debian oldstable, and so on.
The "stable" OS packages are mostly marketing without much substance and while they're convenient for you they also kind of lie to you as well.
Rust often carries its own bugfixes to its LLVM version (before they're accepted upstream). Debian unbundles LLVM from Rust and makes Rust use Debian's LLVM, which creates a risk of undoing Rust's bugfixes and causing miscompilations.
I don't think anyone should be using Debian-packaged Rust. Debian's and Rust's policies are fundamentally incompatible. This results in Debian having a hopelessly outdated inferior package that is a pain for both Debian users and the rest of the Rust ecosystem.
[1]: https://rustconf.com/schedule#how-we-ship-rust-in-opensuse
The fact that so many distros have to go extremely far out of their way, breaking their standard processes, shows that Rust is unique in it's tomfoolery. You guys are advocating for the tail to wag the dog.