Hi,

dftxbs3e <dftxbs3e@free.fr> writes:

> Based on previous discussions to apply <
> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=44778> on the master
> branch instead I submit this new patch (attached) so that it does not
> cause a world rebuild by not altering the package definition hash on
> other platforms.

My understanding is as follows:

- Patch 44778, linked above, was committed on core-updates branch in
  4fff5ab24126a152b50c036b9bf8dc6f2740f094.
- The libffi patch in this patch (45252) is the same as it was in 44778,
  but the scheme code has been changed so that we can apply this patch
  to the master branch without causing a rebuild of many packages.

Is that right?

> +             '())
> +       ,@(if (string-prefix? "powerpc64le-" (or (%current-target-system)
> +                                                (%current-system)))
> +             '(#:phases (modify-phases %standard-phases
> +                          (add-after 'unpack 'apply-patch2
> +                            (lambda* (#:key inputs #:allow-other-keys)
> +                              (let ((patch (assoc-ref inputs
> +                                                      "powerpc64le-patch")))
> +                                (invoke "patch" "--batch" "-p1"
> +                                        "-i" patch))))))
>               '())))
>      (inputs
> -     (if (string-prefix? "powerpc-" (or (%current-target-system)
> +     (cond
> +      ((string-prefix? "powerpc-" (or (%current-target-system)
>                                          (%current-system)))
> -         `(("powerpc-patch" ,@(search-patches
> -                               "libffi-3.3-powerpc-fixes.patch")))
> -         '()))
> +       `(("powerpc-patch" ,@(search-patches
> +                             "libffi-3.3-powerpc-fixes.patch"))))
> +      ((string-prefix? "powerpc64le-" (or (%current-target-system)
> +                                          (%current-system)))
> +       `(("powerpc64le-patch" ,@(search-patches
> +                                 "libffi-float128-powerpc64le.patch"))))
> +      (else '())))

Looks good to me.  I'll test it locally and update here once I've
confirmed that it doesn't cause a full rebuild when applied to master.
Assuming all goes well, I intend to revert
4fff5ab24126a152b50c036b9bf8dc6f2740f094 on core-updates and apply this
patch to master.

> +++ b/gnu/packages/patches/libffi-float128-powerpc64le.patch

Based on...

https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20191124090305.1015485-1-fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com/

...it sounds like upstream libffi maintainers may not have merged this
patch yet.  We should probably check with them to see when they plan to
merge it into upstream, but in the meantime there's no reason not to use
the patch if it works.  Based on what Fabrice said in that thread, it
sounds like the libffi maintainers may be a bit slow in responding to
power-related bugs.

-- 
Chris