From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: bootstrap integration strategies Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 20:23:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87efg7q9jv.fsf@elephly.net> References: <874lh4toq8.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7qwjqsp.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgafgwei.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42180) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fe2yI-0000rD-7D for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 14:39:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fe2yG-0001mm-Tg for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 14:39:14 -0400 Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com ([135.84.80.216]:21095) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fe2yG-0001mX-KM for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 14:39:12 -0400 In-reply-to: <87lgafgwei.fsf@gnu.org> 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: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: "guix-devel@gnu.org" , "Orians, Jeremiah (DTMB)" Hi, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> So what I was saying is probably: we have x86 NOW, can we use it and do >> we want that somehow? OR do we plan some of the work above, and go that >> route? > > I think we should try and use what we have now in =E2=80=98wip-bootstrap= =E2=80=99, and > keeps things unchanged for ARM and GNU/Hurd. Ricardo? I agree. We need to make sure, though, that the Guix build infrastructure doesn=E2=80=99t add more complicated packages to the environ= ment that are not needed. >>>>> there's also another option you didn't mention: ditching the 2.0 >>>>> bootstrap Guile in favor of Mes. That can be done in several steps: >>>> >>>>> 1. Replace the guile-2.0.*.xz binary tarballs with Mes, and add a st= ep >>>>> that builds Guile 2.x using our big bootstrap GCC binary. >>>> Slow but possible >> >> Yes, performance is really the thing here. Currently, mes is about 30x >> slower than Guile. It will definately not work if mes has to interpret >> all of gnu/packages/*.scm, it may work if we can do something smart. > > No no, in my view we=E2=80=99d use Mes simply as the guile-for-build in t= he > early derivations (the interpreter that runs the build phases from (guix > build build-system)). > > It=E2=80=99s a job where we don=E2=80=99t need much performance, but we n= eed the POSIX > layer=E2=80=94=E2=80=98system*=E2=80=99, (ice-9 ftw), and so on. Right. We would need to cut out Guile on the build side. > What=E2=80=99s the exact status of =E2=80=98wip-bootstrap=E2=80=99 on non= Intel arches? Is it > still like =E2=80=98master=E2=80=99? If it is, that=E2=80=99s fine. > > Does it use the Mes/MesCC/tcc path for i686 only, or is it i686 + > x86_64? (I would expect the latter.) > > If there are no regressions, I=E2=80=99d be willing to simply merge it in > core-updates. I=E2=80=99d like some of us to take another look at it=E2= =80=94Ricardo, > Mark, and anyone with an interest in this. And then I guess we could > go. I would love to take a closer look again before merging it. Unfortunately, these days I=E2=80=99m a bit short on time as I=E2=80=99m on= =E2=80=9Cvacation=E2=80=9D with other plans imposed on my schedule. -- Ricardo