Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hello, On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:04:31AM +0200, Jonathan Brielmaier wrote: > I just want to bring POWER up as a freedom-respecting architecture. > Especially the TalosII from RaptorCS[0]. I know that guix does not work > on ppc64le yet, but I'm working for it :) They tend to be quite >

[PATCH] gnu: gzochi: Update to 0.12

Hi Guix folk, Find attached a patch that bumps the version of gzochi, a game development framework I maintain. I've done a `guix build' test run for amd64. Let me know if anything looks untoward. Regards, Julian From d09752ea47bea9ef0a769e4356ffef5cf08242f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Julian

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hello Kei, > > Kei Kebreau skribis: > >> I am interested in helping with non-x86_64 issues. Particularly, helping >> with i686-related changes should be just a change in workflow, but I'm >> interested in obtaining freedom-respecting non-x86 hardware (or

Re: shortening the git test suite

Gábor Boskovits writes: > Mark H Weaver ezt írta (időpont: 2018. júl. 2., H, 6:58): > >> Ricardo Wurmus writes: >> >> > git takes a very long time to build, because it has an extensive test >> > suite. Most of the time is spent in running the SVN interoperability >> > tests, though, which

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hello all, of course I can all but agree that support for "exotic" hardware is very desirable, especially since, as Mark pointed out, we would like it to become more mainstream! On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 08:38:19AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > One thing that would help, in my opinion, is to

Re: shortening the git test suite

Marius Bakke writes: > When debugging the git build, I usually set #:parallel-tests? #t. So > far I haven't come across a failure related to that. I wonder if > is still relevant. That’s a good question. I don’t know. -- Ricardo

Re: shortening the git test suite

Chris Marusich writes: > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > >> Hi Guix, >> >> git takes a very long time to build, because it has an extensive test >> suite. Most of the time is spent in running the SVN interoperability >> tests, though, which are not really all that interesting for most uses >> of

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

On 7/5/18 12:32 AM, Kei Kebreau wrote: >> I'm open to suggestions. Do you see any solution to the problem of how >> to attract more non-x86_64 users, given our current policies? >> >> Thanks, >>Mark > > I am interested in helping with non-x86_64 issues. Particularly, helping > with

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hi again Mark, Mark H Weaver skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Mark H Weaver skribis: >> >>> The end result is that the wishes of the x86_64-using majority are the >>> only ones that seem to matter in this community, and other users are >>> frequently left in a bad spot.

Re: Chrooting into GuixSD

swedebugia writes: > On 2018-06-14 17:01, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >> Oleg Pykhalov writes: >> Would any of you like to document this in the manual? >>> I would because I posted articles like the current one sometime ago. >> Excellent! >> >>> Maybe a separate ‘users-stories.texi’ should be as

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Mark H Weaver skribis: > Another problem is that Guile 2.2's compiler has become so heavy that > it's nearly unbearable to use on slower hardware. Simply running "make" > in my Guix git checkout after updating on my mips-based Yeeloong is so > slow that I'm in the habit of letting it run

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hello, Ricardo Wurmus skribis: >> However, I do feel frustrated by the fact that it's considered >> acceptable in this community to leave non-x86_64 users with broken >> systems in the name of "moving things forward" for x86_64 users. > > I don’t think this is true. What is true is that most

Re: shortening the git test suite

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Hi Guix, > > git takes a very long time to build, because it has an extensive test > suite. Most of the time is spent in running the SVN interoperability > tests, though, which are not really all that interesting for most uses > of git. > > The Makefile says this: > >

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hello Kei, Kei Kebreau skribis: > I am interested in helping with non-x86_64 issues. Particularly, helping > with i686-related changes should be just a change in workflow, but I'm > interested in obtaining freedom-respecting non-x86 hardware (or at least > using a virtual machine as close as

Re: GSoC: Adding a web interface similar to the Hydra web interface

Hi Tatiana, On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 22:54:46 +0200 Tatiana Sholokhova wrote: > If we want to maintain a link to > the previous page we have to filter the database table entries with to > types of filters: one with lower bound on the id, and the other with the > upper bound. Yeah, I know what you

Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

Hi Mark, > However, I do feel frustrated by the fact that it's considered > acceptable in this community to leave non-x86_64 users with broken > systems in the name of "moving things forward" for x86_64 users. I don’t think this is true. > When I suggest that the community would not take