From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id iNbUNWod6mNHOwEAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:22:18 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id YLGBNWod6mNaDQAAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:22:18 +0100 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 E5C8D370DF for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:22:17 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=mGD2Wbe6; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1676287338; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=8VUpF8TUH9l6lvOjnzSzo6U1rysYTrzvZ1yjGpvAuUU=; b=Nnt2R+1dyK38zEhZC+Mp/tn6lWQu6w7kGnjxaajiZ9FkfB1xLV3otx4PRQ1u6A7wYRM0vq Vimba81dGctK586xmAO3wqK922T6GbU7e2Kq3tYUNkS8e9JlXp3W0HAeMkJD2nCi+9CLWa 1znBlj7ZS1L0QHr6ruOe/uY0KpfrLQgw8Ezgwm5p/l5LFoT+go0jWaYu0uYPD4JPhlQQ3C +X1802+vPTfL6d5/uyUdTlAH3GxHV8J9MAHeAnqaGou6Y//2Ybyg4eDLsNAIaaFvvX9AaT z5OUJevTNF8nQ3AVfIlGyzDR9HBBc9lBqNhF2uLFkuQwWTYsObvqcRhCaqW3Ig== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=mGD2Wbe6; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1676287338; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=iQhx1N4A/EHmMvcjLGj2RF7RGCTc6gvocYgij8BxoFlEFLSDn2xy5uP2ekDJ8Jl/UvOrLz pO7c/q93pMT1YWkN9ju/dupH2QBCd2K4ptTjeJoAtb9+nNSziGvsjZoksZs9qQMgHBTEWx b+n9tV/PqgaPxFKqX4Bo/THqlOYv5fNFtpI5C2hCod5tXQsQJnF0Ad1A4P6r+Abu2HS+/J ISdoqC1UabgK5cu0GG4/qfb3RjOcSjk1dY6yB3Qj6+JThbc0dIGGdfMC7W6pUQ0rTWG8Y9 Pm/O4hbqNRBmyJLR4mbmnbhVVE/20+DCBeosXj4FNBxwZMokyHckUKVPQAlVkA== Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pRWuF-0004pd-S3; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 06:21:59 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pRWuE-0004pO-8c for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 06:21:58 -0500 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pRWuC-0007pP-2s for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 06:21:58 -0500 Received: from fews1.riseup.net (fews1-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail.riseup.net", Issuer "R3" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PFhkV2xjfzDq9W; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 11:21:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1676287314; bh=8VUpF8TUH9l6lvOjnzSzo6U1rysYTrzvZ1yjGpvAuUU=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:From; b=mGD2Wbe6kyuIk8tPTztPkJbO/9IZwxiZl6Uh4iCQlIY3IZFf3BDMJHCHRTdow101F iC7uRAZBPRG5B0TOi294PoWFQTmNty1oOszfGX5VP23ARJcVPWEOFTyMZzHh5dzkVk VwnLSgnnSY6ch06s8O1tRrIIsDWiV4s4xoe3b8aE= X-Riseup-User-ID: B588A6D16B6221F9AA18BEBE2D4F9406636C87D0C6C6EA29280E33BCEC770DB5 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4PFhkT5DvBz5wFl; Mon, 13 Feb 2023 11:21:53 +0000 (UTC) References: <29580-1676247058-115332@sneakemail.com> From: Csepp To: vtkq2fqnxd@liamekaens.com Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Estimated overhead of building an orthogonal Musl-based LFS within Guix build system Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:19:25 +0100 In-reply-to: <29580-1676247058-115332@sneakemail.com> Message-ID: <87a61hzu7r.fsf@riseup.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.252.153.129; envelope-from=raingloom@riseup.net; helo=mx1.riseup.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Migadu-Queue-Id: E5C8D370DF X-Spam-Score: -4.96 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.96 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-TUID: ktiBEvhDxcPg vtkq2fqnxd@liamekaens.com writes: > Hi, > > I'm wondering what the overall estimated work or effort might look > like to leverage Guix to build a co-existing family of packages that > are in some sense "orthogonal" to the rest of Guix, based upon > different package versions and perhaps musl libc - similar to > https://github.com/dslm4515/CMLFS for example. > > Could a series of such packages be built up in the same way that these > LFS type builds bootstrap themselves? For example, starting with the > most primitive dependencies and going on upward. > > For this to work, different package versions for the same kind of > package would need to coexist - which I don't believe is inherently a > problem. But also, these builds would need to refer exclusively to > paths and prefixes that are wholly self-contained and orthogonal to > the rest of Guix. > > The overall aim here is to consider building some select packages for > example with musl libc, or perhaps building a "stable track" of > software that is unaffected by the rest of Guix evolving packages. > > The measurement of effort can be subjective. Perhaps it involves > modifying existing recipes and adapting these to point to different > packages/versions. Maybe there is a similar precedent somewhere. > > Any thoughts are appreciated. I would love to see this but similar ideas have already come up (eg.: BSD port) and the response from core contributors (based on experience with Nix) was that maintaining multiple libc's is not worth the effort. I would definitely want a more Alpine-y Guix though.