From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timothy Sample Subject: Re: Building Bash with Geesh Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 19:33:18 -0500 Message-ID: <87lg50x3g1.fsf@ngyro.com> References: <87pnudwdda.fsf@ngyro.com> <87o99xp8mh.fsf@gnu.org> <87sgz9asgr.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]:36662) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gVQYi-00039a-RJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 19:33:30 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gVQYd-0007aJ-7h for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 19:33:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87sgz9asgr.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Fri, 07 Dec 2018 23:21:24 +0100") 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 Hi Ludo, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > ... > > Which parts of 2.2 that 2.0 lacks does it need? PEG? For Geesh, I think it is mostly just trivialities like =E2=80=9Cpeek-char= =E2=80=9D vs. =E2=80=9Clookahead-char=E2=80=9D. I started adapting it once, and fixi= ng one or two small things like that would make the front-end (lexer and parser) work for Guile 2.0. I=E2=80=99m less sure about the back-end. Being relatively= new to Guile means that Guile 2.2 just *is* Guile as far as I know. :) > Overall I=E2=80=99m in favor of changing the bootstrap seeds as rarely as > possible. Also, if our horizon is a full Scheme bootstrap has Jan > proposed (and I think that=E2=80=99s a great plan!), then perhaps we=E2= =80=99ll have to > arrange to not rely on fancy Guile features in build-side code meant to > run early on during bootstrap. So far it was easy to keep (guix build = =E2=80=A6)=20 > valid for both 2.2 and 2.0, but these are simple modules; I don=E2=80=99t= know > whether that=E2=80=99s reasonably feasible for more complex pieces of sof= tware > like Geesh and Gash. > > All that said, the benefit of removing Bash from the seeds may well > outweigh the =E2=80=9Ccost=E2=80=9D of upgrading to Guile 2.2. This makes sense. I=E2=80=99m pretty sure we could stick with version 2.0 = if we=E2=80=99re careful. > ... > > It=E2=80=99d be great if both projects could converge; there=E2=80=99ll s= till be plenty > of challenges to satisfy your playfulness anyway. :-) (Like, say, a > shell=E2=86=92tree-il front-end, hint hint ;-)). Agreed! Imagining a =E2=80=9C(language shell spec)=E2=80=9D module was wha= t got me motivated in the first place. :) > That said I can imagine it=E2=80=99s not that easy and maybe also less fu= n but > it would help the longer-term goal of building a solid foundation for > bootstrapped distros. > > Anyway, kudos on these achievements! I guess we at least need Geesh and > Gash packages now! :-) Forthcoming! > Ludo=E2=80=99. -- Tim