From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37661) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEDKW-0005Od-FA for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:55:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEDKQ-0004m8-TR for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:55:08 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57326) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEDKQ-0004lg-QI for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:55:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eEDKQ-0001Jb-EL for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:55:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#29281] [PATCH] system: vm: Use linux-libre for system-disk-image. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20171113072236.13270-1-m.othacehe@gmail.com> <87o9o6bjsw.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgjazex2.fsf@gmail.com> <87vaiev5mu.fsf@gnu.org> <8760aev47t.fsf@gnu.org> From: Mathieu Othacehe In-reply-to: <8760aev47t.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 12:54:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87lgja9yx5.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 29281@debbugs.gnu.org > So the kernel you built doesn’t boot at all in “qemu-system-arm -M virt”? Nope it does not with this command : --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- qemu-system-arm -M virt -kernel /gnu/store/13jqdcykaarbxzwxnryqinljcjh3k75g-linux-libre-arm-omap2plus-4.13.4/zImage -nographic --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > In practice ‘targeting-arm?’ could be checking (%current-system) and > (%current-target-system), which is not entirely correct but good enough, > or, better yet, use that ‘let-system’ construct I sent you recently to > determine the actual target system. > > Thoughts? Sure it seems like a good idea, until we find better ! I'll try to setup let-system and propose an updated patch. Thanks for your help :) Mathieu