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: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:24:53 -0400 Message-ID: <87a7r8nmuy.fsf@netris.org> References: <20180702101757.22792.51026@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20180702101758.97A6020543@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <8736x1r1g0.fsf@netris.org> <874lhhwkz7.fsf@fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54798) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1faQwI-0004dL-4t for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:26:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1faQwD-000617-SE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:26:14 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([64.112.178.59]:36116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1faQwD-000611-On for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:26:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <874lhhwkz7.fsf@fastmail.com> (Marius Bakke's message of "Mon, 02 Jul 2018 20:28:28 +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: Marius Bakke Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Marius, Marius Bakke writes: > Mark H Weaver writes: > >> 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. Thanks for this, but I'd still like to know the answer to my questions: "What does the [fix-runpath] phase accomplish, and how will armhf users be disadvantaged by the removal of that phase?" If the 'fix-runpath' phase is not strictly needed, then I would prefer to remove it on _all_ systems. If it _is_ needed, then I don't see how we can simply remove it on 'armhf' systems. Thanks, Mark