From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [Nix-dev] /dev/shm inconsistency in chroot
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 22:17:01 +0100
Message-ID: <87wqhpyt9u.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <52E16BC1.6050908@totakura.in> <8738kelbfe.fsf@netris.org>
	<52E23D95.5050307@totakura.in> <52E274DC.6070009@shealevy.com>
	<87sisdi9qm.fsf@netris.org> <52E2A681.2010906@totakura.in>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53902)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1W6oCZ-0004is-5O
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 16:22:16 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1W6oCT-0001tq-9e
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 16:22:10 -0500
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([141.255.128.1]:42515)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1W6oCS-0001tX-Vf
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 16:22:05 -0500
In-Reply-To: <52E2A681.2010906@totakura.in> (Sree Harsha Totakura's message of
	"Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:44:33 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Sree Harsha Totakura <sreeharsha@totakura.in>
Cc: Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com>, nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl, guix-devel@gnu.org

Sree Harsha Totakura <sreeharsha@totakura.in> skribis:

> On 01/24/2014 06:13 PM, Mark H Weaver wrote:
>> Shea Levy <shea@shealevy.com> writes:
>>> > Another option is to mount  a devtmpfs there, for systems which suppo=
rt it.
>
> devtmpfs may give different devices on each machine and they may hinder
> our build reproducibility.

OK.

>> The thing is, we don't actually want most of the system's devices to be
>> in the build environment, do we?  These are all impurities.  I don't
>> think we want /dev/sda, for example.
>
> Sure, I agree.  I propose we start enumerating commonly needed devices
> and create them.

Sounds good.

The major/minor device numbers may not be portable across OSes, which
may be a problem for Nix, so that code may need to be #ifdef=E2=80=99d.

> If in future, a package requires access to certain device while
> building (or during tests) we can include it in our list of created
> device nodes.

Yes, but keep in mind that we=E2=80=99re not going to change that often, be=
cause
it=E2=80=99s inconvenient.

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.