From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Danny Milosavljevic Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add fpc. (version 2) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:45:27 +0100 Message-ID: <20170314224527.7bee1241@scratchpost.org> References: <87poj9xwzp.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87lgtxxial.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87efzpxfxh.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87a8adxct0.fsf@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37671) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnuGA-0005rM-2a for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:45:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnuG6-0003Be-5v for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:45:38 -0400 Received: from dd1012.kasserver.com ([85.13.128.8]:56674) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnuG5-000375-VT for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:45:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87a8adxct0.fsf@openmailbox.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Kei Kebreau Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi, >+ (copy-file (assoc-ref inputs "fpc-binary") >+ "fpc-bin.tar") >+ (zero? (system* "tar" "xvf" "fpc-bin.tar"))))) Why the copy-file and then untar ? Can't it be untarred immediately from where it is? If it is useful, maybe add a comment about the reason. Also, it might be easier to have a fpc-bootstrap package with the bootstrap binaries that installs the binaries required to build fpc normally and to make a fpc package depend on fpc-bootstrap as native-inputs. What do you think? I myself don't have a strong preference about it - but some other packages do it that way. About the fpc-reproducibility.patch , it might make sense to file bugs upstream about it so they add it on their side. Also, these existing bootstrap compilers on sourceforge do not produce bit reproducible executables, right? Should they also have the same patch applied upstream in the future ? Overall LGTM! fpc supports armhf and usually so do we - although not here. We can add armhf support in a future patch, though.