From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: bug#40839: Shepherd activation .GO files are not cross-compiled ... and the Hurd Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 19:59:18 +0200 Message-ID: <871robtpjd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87imhnuc8a.fsf@gnu.org> <87sggru4oh.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55232) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jSP5v-00058W-Kw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:00:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jSP5v-00074Z-1z for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:00:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48765) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jSP5u-00074H-L3 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:00:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jSP5u-0000iu-Ga for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:00:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87sggru4oh.fsf@gmail.com> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Sat, 25 Apr 2020 14:32:14 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 40839@debbugs.gnu.org Mathieu Othacehe writes: >> We did this to avoid too much struggle up front with parameterizing, >> working around, or removing Linux-specifics from "guix system >> --target=3Di586-pc-gnu build,vm,..." > > I have not followed really closely the recent progress on the Hurd, but > I think we may need to synchronize at some point :) Oh no! :) I haven't been following either...but I did notice that "guix system reconfigure" may be tricky on the Hurd, given that it does not have Qemu. I was actively trying not to think about that, hoping some solution would present itself. > As you have noticed our image creation is very tied to Linux and Intel > x86 compatible machines. I would like in the future that producing images > for other architectures/kernels could be less hacky. Yes...the Intel bit isn't really hurting the Hurd efforts yet (sadly), but I see what you mean. > My idea is to: > > * Speed up image creation by removing the need to use VM to produce > images. > > * Augment the operating-system record, or provide a new record, that > encapsulates information related to image layout (partitions, > bootloader location), target architecture (i586-pc-gnu, > aarch64-linux, ...). > > This way, one would just have to run `guix system disk-image > my-board.scm' or `guix system disk-image --board=3Dxxx config.scm', and > not have to worry about specifying the correct target triplet, kernel > and bootloader packages. > > On the wip-disk-image, I propose the creation of an "image" record in > (gnu image), but I'm still not sure how to interface it. Thanks for the ping and the summary: I should really look into that! I am currently still looking to consolidate all the cross build fixes, and how to migrate the Shepherd and services hacks into the regular framework. I'm guessing that's all stuff that wip-disk-image does not touch/change. Greetings, janneke --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.com