From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: Re: bootstrap integration strategies Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 16:19:39 +0200 Message-ID: <871sc7w744.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874lh4toq8.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7qwjqsp.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgafgwei.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59102) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdyvV-00082f-TX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 10:20:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdyvS-0007a2-L1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 10:20:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87lgafgwei.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Fri, 13 Jul 2018 14:20:05 +0200") 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: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: "guix-devel@gnu.org" , "Orians, Jeremiah (DTMB)" Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> So what I was saying is probably: we have x86 NOW, can we use it and do >> we want that somehow? OR do we plan some of the work above, and go that >> route? > > I think we should try and use what we have now in =E2=80=98wip-bootstrap= =E2=80=99, and > keeps things unchanged for ARM and GNU/Hurd. Ricardo? Yes, let's also ask Ricardo. >> Yes, performance is really the thing here. Currently, mes is about 30x >> slower than Guile. It will definately not work if mes has to interpret >> all of gnu/packages/*.scm, it may work if we can do something smart. > > No no, in my view we=E2=80=99d use Mes simply as the guile-for-build in t= he > early derivations (the interpreter that runs the build phases from (guix > build build-system)). OK... > It=E2=80=99s a job where we don=E2=80=99t need much performance, but we n= eed the POSIX > layer=E2=80=94=E2=80=98system*=E2=80=99, (ice-9 ftw), and so on. Mes has system*, no ice-9 ftw yet, not sure about the so on; adding things like these should be fun though. > My hesitation comes from the fact that this will increase maintenance > cost on the Guix side. At the same time, this is clearly the direction > we want to take, and I such I think we have to get our act together and > go forth. Agreed. That's important to keep an eye on. A requirement for a bootstrap process is also its transparency. > What=E2=80=99s the exact status of =E2=80=98wip-bootstrap=E2=80=99 on non= Intel arches? Is it > still like =E2=80=98master=E2=80=99? If it is, that=E2=80=99s fine. > Does it use the Mes/MesCC/tcc path for i686 only, or is it i686 + > x86_64? (I would expect the latter.) I haven't started integrating the bootprocess at all, not even for i686/x86_64; there's only an alternative path to build gcc-4.7.4 atm. That i686x86 gcc can be built on i686 and x86_64: ./pre-inst-env guix build gcc-mesboot it's advisable to set (define %fake-bootstrap? #t) ; cheat using Guile instead of Mes for sp= eed-up? in gnu/packages/mes.scm at first; set it to #f later and let it run overnight :-) > If there are no regressions, I=E2=80=99d be willing to simply merge it in > core-updates. I=E2=80=99d like some of us to take another look at it=E2= =80=94Ricardo, > Mark, and anyone with an interest in this. And then I guess we could > go. > > How does that sound? That's really great...but we need integration work into the x86 bootstrap first too. Do you/Ricardo want to help with that too? > Thank you for your patience! Thanks for your help and support! janneke. --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.com