From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id kL4EKqSQ6F5eTwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:28:04 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id GEX1JaSQ6F6mLAAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:28:04 +0000 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 242E09401CF for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:28:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:33250 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl7sx-0006kj-34 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 05:28:03 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44498) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl7sn-0006j0-6n for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 05:27:53 -0400 Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.200]:44063) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jl7sl-0007BC-4I; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 05:27:52 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 92.169.129.147 Received: from bababa (lfbn-idf2-1-1315-147.w92-169.abo.wanadoo.fr [92.169.129.147]) (Authenticated sender: mail@ambrevar.xyz) by relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D5C4E20009; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:27:45 +0000 (UTC) From: Pierre Neidhardt To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Reducing LLVM closure size In-Reply-To: <87zh93wejf.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87d064slev.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87zh93wejf.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 11:27:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87eeqficmm.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.183.200; envelope-from=mail@ambrevar.xyz; helo=relay7-d.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/16 05:27:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=1, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.11 X-TUID: 3wJ8rADWMoQm --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> - either move the libs to a "lib" output, >> - or move the "bin" and "include" folder to a new output. >> >> The second approach has the benefit of being less disruptive for depende= nts. > > I have a slight preference for a =E2=80=9Clib=E2=80=9D output since that= =E2=80=99s more in line > with what we do for other packages. OK. > Nice! I looked for something like this when I packaged > =E2=80=98clang-tools-extra=E2=80=99 and didn=E2=80=99t find it. This sho= uld go into the next > =E2=80=98staging=E2=80=99 branch (or =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99?). I can send a patch for llvm-10, but I guess many llvm-dependents will have to be updated accordingly. I suppose that the input =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ("llvm" ,llvm) =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- will need to be turned to =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ("llvm" ,llvm "lib") =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- for most packages. I have no experience with LLVM, so can someone confirm that this is the right way to go? >> All in all, it looks like we can save 52 MiB out of 140 MiB from the LLVM >> package (and 210 MiB from its closure). > > That=E2=80=99d be great. To clarify the ambiguous sentence I wrote above, we would save 52 MiB from the closure size of LLVM. > An additional option would be to have a package with fewer backends by > default (currently all of them are enabled and that takes up quite some > space). In particular, Mesa doesn=E2=80=99t depend to depend on an LLVM = variant > with 15 backends when it=E2=80=99s only going to use one. Are you suggesting an alternative or a tweak to add on top of my suggestion? Where would we store the different backends? In different outputs? On which backend does Mesa depend for instance? Cheers! =2D-=20 Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEUPM+LlsMPZAEJKvom9z0l6S7zH8FAl7okJEACgkQm9z0l6S7 zH/9YQf/d4tCZzxOOR5LlBPON4b6KW3epHyo5W6dR6TTljP52fhnzqEa+xd0gml0 hIyXOEa+N5CvqdfJ6pllLgig6pDIhgkzm1ecsn7Cdw727W/CIxE5KNA/BQDQWYBf 8R+6Y/fnRrryP+MjUAzi6gGghoY4tT42ThJS9aJH7x+Lm1ysvd8HfBeyeg6DEECV HqTUFtAr9Zt8Z4vGwQA147E0YMPYZVQA08HaZKYcOiJinj4W/fxM9CVwCKogSPlW 9AWplqa/9sI9bHzh6Tdebh5t1xZTnN/TS2eYJ/aprCBzTtUIX7S9sRZJv3Dp76XW 9bBwSj1kykFZWNXNTT6//8fvpA/UVQ== =G5Vl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--