From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id SJPEDykn1l7LNQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:17:13 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id sNOJCykn1l7IfQAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:17:13 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72817940607 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 10:17:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48576 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yn-0006f6-NC for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:17:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52570) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yg-0006dW-L9 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:17:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54663) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yg-0005wC-Bm for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:17:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yg-00065a-7j for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:17:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#41541: merge wip-hurd-vm Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:17:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41541 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Received: via spool by 41541-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41541.159109300323380 (code B ref 41541); Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:17:02 +0000 Received: (at 41541) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Jun 2020 10:16:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37976 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yN-000652-Ah for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:16:43 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45104) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yL-00064n-5P for 41541@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:16:41 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41559) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yF-0005u8-RA; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:16:35 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:fa:a50:a896:aee9:1571:f8a1] (port=52148 helo=meru) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jg3yF-0005H1-C6; Tue, 02 Jun 2020 06:16:35 -0400 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87o8qavktf.fsf@gnu.org> <87tv01vgqy.fsf@gnu.org> <87blm54hae.fsf@gnu.org> <874krtyhtg.fsf@gnu.org> <87h7vtzupa.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 12:16:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87h7vtzupa.fsf@gnu.org> (Jan Nieuwenhuizen's message of "Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:24:33 +0200") Message-ID: <87r1uxwz5q.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 41541@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: GAWdrcgl0eHT > Now, how could we have runsystem run another RC? Hmm, runsystem is > being called with --load and --system arguments too; we could even > give it an --rc=RC-FILE if that's more convenient. > > Then, we would only need to add this RC-FILE to the system, maybe add a > %hurd-"something" service? > > Hmm. Please share your thoughts, I'm having a go at this. Having an RC argument passed directly by the bootloader seems like a good way to proceed for me. This is somehow remotely similar to what we are doing with the "initrd" on Linux (pointing to some piece of code that needs to be loaded before starting the init process). You would also need to store this RC argument in the record, by adding a new field or stuffing it in the "initrd" field. Then, we wouldn't need an extra service I guess. If we are going that way, the procedures in (gnu build hurd-boot) could be passed the "hurd" package to install, and we could maybe get rig of the "/hurd" symlink? Thanks, Mathieu