feat: basic support for linux riscv64

[kxxt]

This PR introduces basic support for riscv64.

Tests done on Arch Linux riscv64:

• build and run rqbit-desktop in addpatch: cargo-tauri 2.2.5-1 felixonmars/archriscv-packages#4501

closes #7522 (A new release on npm should be necessary)
closes #10945

[github-actions]

Package Changes Through 552f960

There are 5 changes which include tauri-cli with minor, tauri with patch, tauri-utils with minor, tauri-bundler with minor, @tauri-apps/cli with minor

Planned Package Versions

The following package releases are the planned based on the context of changes in this pull request.

package	current	next
tauri-utils	2.2.0	2.3.0
tauri-bundler	2.2.4	2.3.0
tauri-runtime	2.4.0	2.4.1
tauri-runtime-wry	2.4.0	2.4.1
tauri-codegen	2.0.5	2.0.6
tauri-macros	2.0.5	2.0.6
tauri-plugin	2.0.5	2.0.6
tauri-build	2.0.6	2.0.7
tauri	2.3.0	2.3.1
@tauri-apps/cli	2.3.0	2.4.0
tauri-cli	2.3.0	2.4.0

Add another change file through the GitHub UI by following this link.

---

Read about change files or the docs at github.com/jbolda/covector

[FabianLars]

Thanks for the PR. Did you only test tauri dev or also tauri build (including bundling)? I'm very certain that the changes in the appimage bundler won't work because none of the appimage tools we use (linuxdeploy + plugins etc) support riscv.
That doesn't make me hopeful for the deb/rpm changes as well but i'm a bit too out of the loop there to judge that.

[kxxt]

Thanks for the PR. Did you only test tauri dev or also tauri build (including bundling)?

I tested cargo tauri build -b deb --ci but didn't test tauri dev. I can do further testing of more commands if necessary.

I'm very certain that the changes in the appimage bundler won't work because none of the appimage tools we use (linuxdeploy + plugins etc) support riscv.

Yes. But adding riscv there should make the code future-proof when the appimage tools start supporting riscv.

[FabianLars]

I tested cargo tauri build -b deb --ci but didn't test tauri dev. I can do further testing of more commands if necessary.

i don't care too much about tauri dev (if you're running a riscv system) but the rpm bundler should be tested as well if you change its code.

Yes. But adding riscv there should make the code future-proof when the appimage tools start supporting riscv.

That is in the very far future (or potentially never) and with your changes the user facing error now isn't as clear anymore. Without your changes the user will get a "unsupported platform" error and now they'll probably get an http error instead.

[kxxt]

i don't care too much about tauri dev (if you're running a riscv system) but the rpm bundler should be tested as well if you change its code.

Thanks! I will test the rpm bundler. Marking this PR as draft until test is done.

That is in the very far future (or potentially never) and with your changes the user facing error now isn't as clear anymore. Without your changes the user will get a "unsupported platform" error and now they'll probably get an http error instead.

Your concern is certainly valid. We riscv64 packagers are generally familiar with http error encountered when a prebuilt asset isn't available for riscv64. But for normal users that error might be a little cryptic. I will remove the changes to the appimage code.

[kxxt]

I have tested that the rpm bundler works for riscv64.

[kxxt]

I have dropped the changes to appimage bundler. I think this PR is ready for review now.

[lucasfernog]

i'm gonna trust your tests here since i can't easily test on riscv64, code wise it looks good