Re: arm-none-eabi toolchain and compiling C++ stuff

Attila Lendvai writes: > is that a bug in (gnu packages embedded)? shall i look into fixing it? > > or am i the one who has invalid expectations? FWIW I have successfully been using make-arm-none-eabi-nano-toolchain-4.9 with the Axoloti DSP board (via the axoloti-patcher package).

Re: arm-none-eabi toolchain and compiling C++ stuff

On 2023-12-20 21:28, Attila Lendvai wrote: dear Guix, i'm trying to compile something to a raspberry rp2040 microcontroller (https://codeberg.org/Riku_V/pico-serprog). $ guix shell gcc-toolchain cmake make pkg-config -e "((@ (gnu packages embedded) make-arm-none-eabi-toolchain-7-20

arm-none-eabi toolchain and compiling C++ stuff

dear Guix, i'm trying to compile something to a raspberry rp2040 microcontroller (https://codeberg.org/Riku_V/pico-serprog). $ guix shell gcc-toolchain cmake make pkg-config -e "((@ (gnu packages embedded) make-arm-none-eabi-toolchain-7-2018-q2-update))" $ cd _deps $ git c

Re: nss-certs@3.81: server certificate verification failed. CAfile: /gnu/store/…/ca-certificates.crt CRLfile: none

Hi, On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 at 18:18, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: > It's incorrectly sending an ISRG Root X1 certificate, which chains > to the expired DST Root CA X3. > > It should not send ISRG Root X1 at all. Thanks for the explanations. Reported upstream. Cheers, simon

Re: nss-certs@3.81: server certificate verification failed. CAfile: /gnu/store/…/ca-certificates.crt CRLfile: none

Hi Simon, zimoun 写道： Is it a bug in Guix nss-certs side? Or on Gitlab server side? No Guix bug, the server is misconfigured. It's incorrectly sending an ISRG Root X1 certificate, which chains to the expired DST Root CA X3. It should not send ISRG Root X1 at all. Kind regards, T G-R

nss-certs@3.81: server certificate verification failed. CAfile: /gnu/store/…/ca-certificates.crt CRLfile: none

/store/h51ffnnqqkydhvgmyd77fhswwcddlan9-profile/etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt CRLfile: none --8<---cut here---end--->8--- but it does not happen when running nss-certs@3.71 instead, --8<---cut here---start-&g

arm-none-eabi-toolchain fails to build, solution?

Hello, arm-none-eabi-toolchain fails to build as I reported here: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/42561 As you can see in the issue I kinda fixed compilation by changing gcc's version to 7, but I'm not sure if it's just a dirty hack or the right solution. Can someone take a look at it? Jan

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Theodoros Foradis writes: > The one issue I have observed is that newlib (and newlib-nano), is not > provided as a substitute, when installed with a toolchain containing > xgcc-6. I think that only the original newlib derivations are being > built on hydra (the

[PATCH v3 1/3] gnu: Add gdb-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (gdb-arm-none-eabi): New variable. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 13 + 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm index a7af69f..0b4f9ab 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm +++ b/gnu/packages

Re: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add gdb-arm-none-eabi.

LGTM!

[PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add gdb-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (gdb-arm-none-eabi): New variable. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 13 + 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm index a7af69f..0b4f9ab 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm +++ b/gnu/packages

[PATCH 0/3] gnu: Add gdb-arm-none-eabi and openocd.

Theodoros Foradis (3): gnu: Add gdb-arm-none-eabi. gnu: Add hidapi. gnu: Add openocd. gnu/local.mk |2 + gnu/packages/embedded.scm| 85 + gnu/packages/hidapi.scm | 60 gnu

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

On 2016-10-16 13:01, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: Ricardo Wurmus writes: Theodoros Foradis writes: Hi, I see that the original patches were applied in master. Did you check if cross-binutils with 2.25.1 source works for your use case? Yes, I’m using the

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Theodoros Foradis writes: > >> Hi, >> >> I see that the original patches were applied in master. Did you check if >> cross-binutils with 2.25.1 source works for your use case? > > Yes, I’m using the regular cross-binutils. Thanks

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Hi Ricardo, diff --git a/gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch b/gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch new file mode 100644 index 000..442f52b --- /dev/null +++ b/gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch @@ -0,0 +1,201 @@ +From Anatol

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi-gcc-6 and patches.

Hi Theodoros, > * gnu/packages/embedded.scm (gcc-arm-none-eabi-6): New variable. > * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch : New file. > * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-cross-environment-variables.patch : New file. […] > diff --git a/gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-a

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Theodoros Foradis writes: > Hi, > > I see that the original patches were applied in master. Did you check if > cross-binutils with 2.25.1 source works for your use case? Yes, I’m using the regular cross-binutils. Thanks for the hint! > Would you like me to reformat my

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Hi, I see that the original patches were applied in master. Did you check if cross-binutils with 2.25.1 source works for your use case? Would you like me to reformat my patches for gcc-6.2.0, so that they can be applied on current master, or is there some other issue blocking that? Regards, --

Re: [PATCH 3/3] gnu: Add newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi.

Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis: > >> * gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi): New variable. > > [...] > >> +(define-public newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi >> + (package (inherit new

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

; binaries. Some >>> flags (that I had been using with 6.2.0) are missing from that version of >>> GCC 4.9, >>> so I added 6.2.0 as an extra option. I have tested it to produce working >>> binaries. >>> >>> Here are some modifications to Ricardo's p

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

) are missing from that version of >> GCC 4.9, >> so I added 6.2.0 as an extra option. I have tested it to produce working >> binaries. >> >> Here are some modifications to Ricardo's patches for the arm-none-eabi >> bare metal cross compiler. The following ch

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

extra option. I have tested it to produce working > binaries. > > Here are some modifications to Ricardo's patches for the arm-none-eabi > bare metal cross compiler. The following changes have been made: > > - I have modified xbinutils to use binutils 2.25.1 from cr

Re: [PATCH 3/3] gnu: Add newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi.

Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis: > * gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi): New variable. [...] > +(define-public newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi > + (package (inherit newlib-arm-none-eabi) > +(name "newlib-nano") I think it should be “n

Re: [PATCH 2/3] gnu: Add newlib-arm-none-eabi.

Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis: > * gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-arm-none-eabi): New variable. [...] > + #:configure-flags '("--target=arm-none-eabi" > + "--enable-newlib-io-long-long" > +

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Hi! Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis: > here's a patch series I've been sitting on for about a year. It's a compiler > for bare-metal binaries targetting arm-none-eabi. I'm using this successfully > to compile ChibiOS for the Axoloti Core board. Awesome, congrats!

Re: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi cross compiler.

xbinutils and xgcc are taken > +;; from https://launchpadlibrarian.net/209776344/release.txt > + > +(define-public xbinutils-arm-none-eabi [...] > + (arguments > + `(,@(substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments parent) > + ((#:configure-flags fla

[PATCH v2 0/4] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

modifications to Ricardo's patches for the arm-none-eabi bare metal cross compiler. The following changes have been made: - I have modified xbinutils to use binutils 2.25.1 from cross-base, as it compiles correctly with it. The version from the svn commit that was used by Ricardo is compiling

[PATCH v2 4/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi-toolchain.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (arm-none-eabi-toolchain): New procedure. (arm-none-eabi-toolchain-4.9, arm-none-eabi-toolchain-nano-4.9): New variables. (arm-none-eabi-toolchain-6, arm-none-eabi-toolchain-nano-6): New variables. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 36

[PATCH v2 3/4] gnu: Add newlib-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-arm-none-eabi): New procedure. (newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi): New procedure. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 59 +++ 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm

[PATCH v2 4/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi-toolchain.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (arm-none-eabi-toolchain): New procedure. (arm-none-eabi-toolchain-4.9, arm-none-eabi-toolchain-nano-4.9): New variables. (arm-none-eabi-toolchain-6, arm-none-eabi-toolchain-nano-6): New variables. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 36

[PATCH v2 2/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi-gcc-6 and patches.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (gcc-arm-none-eabi-6): New variable. * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch : New file. * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-cross-environment-variables.patch : New file. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 12 ++ .../patches/gcc-6-arm

[PATCH v2 0/1] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

are the modifications to Ricardo's patches for the arm-none-eabi bare metal cross compiler: - Cross-binutils is modified to use binutils 2.5.1, that cross-base provides, as it is producing working binaries. The version of binutils from the svn commit that was used by Ricardo is compiling correct

[PATCH v2 2/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi-gcc-6 and patches.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (gcc-arm-none-eabi-6): New variable. * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-arm-none-eabi-multilib.patch : New file. * gnu/packages/patches/gcc-6-cross-environment-variables.patch : New file. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 12 ++ .../patches/gcc-6-arm

[PATCH v2 3/4] gnu: Add newlib-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-arm-none-eabi): New procedure. (newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi): New procedure. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 59 +++ 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm

[PATCH v2 1/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi cross compiler.

trivial) + #:use-module (gnu packages) + #:use-module (gnu packages bison) + #:use-module (gnu packages cross-base) + #:use-module (gnu packages flex) + #:use-module (gnu packages gcc) + #:use-module (gnu packages perl) + #:use-module (gnu packages texinfo)) + +(define-public xbinutils-arm-n

[PATCH v2 1/4] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi cross compiler.

trivial) + #:use-module (gnu packages) + #:use-module (gnu packages bison) + #:use-module (gnu packages cross-base) + #:use-module (gnu packages flex) + #:use-module (gnu packages gcc) + #:use-module (gnu packages perl) + #:use-module (gnu packages texinfo)) + +(define-public xbinutils-arm-n

[PATCH 2/3] gnu: Add newlib-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-arm-none-eabi): New variable. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 44 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm index 17ca784..8f484e5 100644 --- a/gnu/packages

[PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add arm-none-eabi cross compiler.

#:use-module (gnu packages flex) + #:use-module (gnu packages perl) + #:use-module (gnu packages texinfo)) + +;; Commit hashes and SVN revisions for xbinutils and xgcc are taken +;; from https://launchpadlibrarian.net/209776344/release.txt + +(define-public xbinutils-arm-none-eabi +

[PATCH 3/3] gnu: Add newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi.

* gnu/packages/embedded.scm (newlib-nano-arm-none-eabi): New variable. --- gnu/packages/embedded.scm | 20 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm b/gnu/packages/embedded.scm index 8f484e5..43f6068 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/embedded.scm +++ b

[PATCH 0/3] Add GCC cross compiler for arm-none-eabi.

Hi Guix, here's a patch series I've been sitting on for about a year. It's a compiler for bare-metal binaries targetting arm-none-eabi. I'm using this successfully to compile ChibiOS for the Axoloti Core board. I've chosen to package the particular compiler version that is used for the Axoloti

Re: none

Hi Chris, thanks for your contribution! On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0500, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: > GNU MediaGoblin is "hip and cool" (or something) in that it uses a web > based issue tracker primarily. Do you think we could learn from GNU MediaGoblin to be hipper and cooler?

Re: none

Jookia writes: >> What makes things easier for me personally is to not worry about >> urgency. Nothing I do is really urgent. If I need to provide a package >> for someone at the institute I don’t wait for acceptance in Guix >> upstream; I just push it to our own “guix-bimsb” repo, which is

Re: none

On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 02:35:41AM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > It does not include your patches. I archived the messages that included > your previously outstanding patches when you withdrew them from > consideration. Many of your patches were to parts of the system that I > don't understand.

Re: none

On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 02:17:21PM +1000, Jookia wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:19:42PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > > I can look at my Guix mailbox to see all outstanding patches. > > Can you post a list of this? Does it include my outstanding patches? It does not include your patches. I

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:19:42PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > I can look at my Guix mailbox to see all outstanding patches. Can you post a list of this? Does it include my outstanding patches? > By the way, if someone asks the submitter to look into something or make > a change, the patch is

Re: none

> If the maintainer wants to do additional changes, I also prefer he does it in > a separate patch/commit, as that would enable me to git pull --ff instead of > merge... I like fetching origin master, checking which patches made it in and then rebase -i origin/master and drop the commits that

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 12:38:44PM -0400, myglc2 wrote: l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: Hi Roel, Roel Janssen skribis: [...] One thing that really helped me in reducing the time to contribute changes to the upstream distribution, is to have a good workflow. I ended

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:50:14PM +1000, Jookia wrote: > On top of that, the maintainers can't even use the mailing list properly: > Patches are lost, discussion doesn't happen, things are lost and it's hard for > new users to join in. Who exactly benefits from this workflow compared to >

Re: none

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Hi Roel, > > Roel Janssen skribis: > [...] > >> One thing that really helped me in reducing the time to contribute >> changes to the upstream distribution, is to have a good workflow. I >> ended up doing the following: >> 1. Make the

Re: none

Hi Roel, Roel Janssen skribis: > For the last twenty weeks or so I have started contributing packages to > GNU Guix mainly because Pjotr gave me the opportunity to do so. For me, > upstreaming was part of the deal, and I'd say it has taken me at least > two times the time it took

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Leo Famulari wrote: >> You've seen the mistakes I made, and the little syntactic things that >> kept going wrong over time. Near the end of my internship, however, I >> saw a positive change: Reviewers actually make little changes, instead >>

Re: none

> You've seen the mistakes I made, and the little syntactic things that > kept going wrong over time. Near the end of my internship, however, I > saw a positive change: Reviewers actually make little changes, instead > of leaving it up to the submitter to ``fix the indendation''. This > change

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 02:23:42PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Pjotr Prins writes: > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 06:48:47AM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: > >> In the spirit of (friendly) provocation, I'd nitpick on the term > >> ‘purist views’ and suggest the

Re: none

Pjotr Prins writes: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 06:48:47AM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: >> In the spirit of (friendly) provocation, I'd nitpick on the term >> ‘purist views’ and suggest the word ‘standards’ instead. ;-) > > Alright. I concede ;) > >> But

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 06:48:47AM +0200, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: > In the spirit of (friendly) provocation, I'd nitpick on the term > ‘purist views’ and suggest the word ‘standards’ instead. ;-) Alright. I concede ;) > But seriously: the code reviews? Most Free software projects don't > do

Re: none

Pjotr Prins writes: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 02:51:38PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> In >> , >> you already identified exactly what we were going to say. :-) >> >> Namely, why are

Re: none

Hiya, Pjotr, On 2016-07-22 04:06, Pjotr Prins wrote: A provocation: because of purism GNU Guix takes an elitist approach. I've honestly never felt any elitism coming from the Guix project. Consistency, certainly. _Much_ more so than in most other free software projects I know. I find it helps

Re: none

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 04:06:56AM +0200, Pjotr Prins wrote: > A provocation: because of purism GNU Guix takes an elitist approach. > > I am thinking that we need another project because it appears to be > impossible to combine low threshold with GNU Guix goals. > > How about Alt-Guix, a

Re: none

A provocation: because of purism GNU Guix takes an elitist approach. I am thinking that we need another project because it appears to be impossible to combine low threshold with GNU Guix goals. How about Alt-Guix, a packaging effort without opinion. As long as a package builds it gets accepted.

Re: none

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 02:51:38PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > In > , > you already identified exactly what we were going to say. :-) > > Namely, why are patches applied in a build

Re: none

Hi Pjotr, Pjotr Prins skribis: > From 5fd8f64794b27f59f6688177a7a9e532b5d57f01 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:13:27 + > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add elixir. > To: guix-devel@gnu.org > From: Pjotr Prins > References:

Re: [WIP] Cross-compiler for arm-none-eabi

utils, and newlib as others, right? > Generating “patches” on the other hand works fine. It’s really just > this: > > ~~~ > /gnu/store/p787lrv17m25v0cdrdzw66r9b7hk1109-gcc-cross-sans-libc-arm-none-eabi-4.9.3-1.224288/bin/arm-none-eabi-g++ > -nostdlib -fno-exceptions -fno-

Re: none

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:22:36PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: Tomáš Čech sleep_wal...@gnu.org skribis: I haven't seen any further reaction for 12 days so I hope you don't mind that I resend it again. Reaction to what? Reaction to the first patch version. S_W pgp3fwHYtC80q.pgp

Re: none

Tomáš Čech sleep_wal...@gnu.org skribis: I haven't seen any further reaction for 12 days so I hope you don't mind that I resend it again. Reaction to what? Ludo’.

Re: none

On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 09:35:42AM +0100, Tomas Cech wrote: At Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:04:23 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: Tomas Cech sleep_wal...@suse.cz skribis: I tried to install Guix as alternative OS to my Gentoo and openSUSE installations to give a try. I tried unsupported scenario -

Re: none

Tomas Cech sleep_wal...@suse.cz skribis: At Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:04:23 +0100, [...] 1] if you set device to partition (and not to disk) in your grub-configuration like this: (bootloader (grub-configuration (device /dev/sda4))) Why would you want to use a partition

Re: none

At Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:04:23 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: Tomas Cech sleep_wal...@suse.cz skribis: I tried to install Guix as alternative OS to my Gentoo and openSUSE installations to give a try. I tried unsupported scenario - installation on LVM volume and separate /boot partition

Re: none

Tomas Cech sleep_wal...@suse.cz skribis: I tried to install Guix as alternative OS to my Gentoo and openSUSE installations to give a try. I tried unsupported scenario - installation on LVM volume and separate /boot partition until I was told it is unsupported. Separate boot wasn't hard as I

Re: none

Sree Harsha Totakura sreehar...@totakura.in skribis: The reason why the transport tests are failing is that gnurl is not being built with HTTPS protocol support and these tests expect gnurl to have those. The HTTPS support was not built into gnurl because pkg-config was not available as

Re: none

On 02/12/2014 06:36 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: It would be nice if GNUnet’s ‘configure’ script would check whether gnurl has HTTPS support. It now does. :-) Sree

Re: none

Andreas Enge andr...@enge.fr skribis: On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 06:36:13PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: It would be nice if GNUnet’s ‘configure’ script would check whether gnurl has HTTPS support. Concurred. Or maybe make pkg-config a mandatory input and stop when it is not found. Ever so

Re: none

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:30:53PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: I think this is largely because the official PKG_CHECK_MODULES Autoconf macro doesn’t fail by default when pkg-config is not found (which may or may not be a good idea, depending on the package.) Then it is the authors'

Re: none

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: John Darrington j...@gnu.org skribis: In my opinion the changelog conventions are achronistic, unintuitive, and bring benefit neither to developers nor users. Well, opinions may vary. It benefits me when I review other people’s patches, because it

Re: none

John Darrington j...@darrington.wattle.id.au skribis: I don't object to the spending time of writing changelogs. I just think the information that the GCS suggests is not helpful. It is not usefull to say changed file foo.scm, because using git show that is obvious. There is even a

Re: none

John Darrington j...@gnu.org skribis: In my opinion the changelog conventions are achronistic, unintuitive, and bring benefit neither to developers nor users. Well, opinions may vary. It benefits me when I review other people’s patches, because it helps me understand the structure of the