Mark H Weaver writes: > 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? I'm sorry, I forgot to address your actual concerns. The (buggy) workaround was put in place and discussed in . The meat of it can be found in (guix build-system meson): ;; XXX PatchELF fails to build on armhf, so we skip ;; the 'fix-runpath' phase there for now. It is used ;; to avoid superfluous entries in RUNPATH as described ;; in , so armhf may now ;; have different runtime dependencies from other arches. Now, I'm not proud of this "workaround", but it's not exactly new, so I don't see why we should rush to fix it now. Given how late we are in this staging cycle, I would prefer delaying any proper fix until the next round.