From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf. Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:29:19 -0400 Message-ID: <8736x1r1g0.fsf@netris.org> References: <20180702101757.22792.51026@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20180702101758.97A6020543@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49720) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fa2ex-00066f-4p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:30:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fa2es-0003jD-If for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:30:43 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([64.112.178.59]:33150) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fa2es-0003in-2U for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:30:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20180702101758.97A6020543@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> (Marius Bakke's message of "Mon, 2 Jul 2018 06:17:58 -0400 (EDT)") 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: Marius Bakke Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Marius, mbakke@fastmail.com (Marius Bakke) writes: > mbakke pushed a commit to branch staging > in repository guix. > > commit cb4b508cd68df89bfbd5255a0c5569f8318ad50f > Author: Marius Bakke > Date: Mon Jul 2 12:07:58 2018 +0200 > > build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf. > > This follows up commit d5b5a15a4046362377f1a45d466b43bb6e93d4f which doesn't > work because %current-system etc expands before the actual build. I'm disappointed by this workaround that simply removes the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf. Is that phase needed, or is it truly optional? What does the phase accomplish, and how will armhf users be disadvantaged by the removal of that phase? This feels like "sweeping the problem under the rug" to me. > Fixes . I don't see the connection between that bug and this commit. How does this commit fix that bug? Thanks, Mark