[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/tealdeer: exclude unsupported targets

[Danilo Bargen]

Hello Thomas

> Thanks for working on this. Your patch is badly line-wrapped by your
> e-mail client. You can disable wrapping in Claws Mail, or better you
> can use "git send-email". See below for another comment.

Oops, I do use Claws Mail, and used "Edit with external editor" for pasting the patch. I didn't notice that this doesn't disable auto-wrapping.

> Side note: overall, if you take a step back, it is absolutely
> mind-blowing that a simple application showing tldr pages has a
> dependency on architecture-specific things. There is really no sane
> reason to have such dependencies, but apparently the Rust ecosystem is
> not completely sane... :-/

The reason is that Tealdeer uses https://github.com/rustls/rustls for TLS, which depends on the "ring" library https://github.com/briansmith/ring/. To quote from its README:

> ring is focused on the implementation, testing, and optimization of a core set of cryptographic operations exposed via an easy-to-use (and hard-to-misuse) API. ring exposes a Rust API and is written in a hybrid of Rust, C, and assembly language.
> ...
> Most of the C and assembly language code in ring comes from BoringSSL, and BoringSSL is derived from OpenSSL. ring merges changes from BoringSSL regularly. Also, several changes that were developed for ring have been contributed to and integrated into BoringSSL.

Due to the reliance on BoringSSL and assembly code for some parts of the project, it is not as portable as pure-Rust code. Support for MIPS, PowerPC and other architectures is in the works, but not yet finished.

Previously tealdeer used OpenSSL, but quite a few of the users had trouble with broken OpenSSL installations. Plus, it made cross-compilation and static builds much harder. Using rustls makes this much easier on the common platforms, but of course, this has certain limitations with regards to more obscure target architectures.

If you would rather remove tealdeer from Buildroot (because the config is getting too complex), that would be OK for me. Otherwise, I'd update my patch based on your suggestions.

Danilo