From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: csanchezdll@gmail.com (Carlos =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A1nchez?= de La Lama) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: gcc-4.9: Update to 4.9.4. Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:03:11 +0200 Message-ID: <7tzilsykpc.fsf@gmail.com> References: <7t4m42uque.fsf@gmail.com> <20161024131638.GA22075@jasmine> <7tfunlu86a.fsf@gmail.com> <87funl1y3w.fsf@duckhunt.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42728) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byvlZ-0000Ti-1L for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:03:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byvlU-000530-PB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:03:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-x243.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::243]:35901) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byvlU-00052o-HV for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:03:16 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-x243.google.com with SMTP id c78so376877wme.3 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 00:03:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87funl1y3w.fsf@duckhunt.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> (Marius Bakke's message of "Mon, 24 Oct 2016 18:00:03 +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: Marius Bakke , Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Marius, Mark, > Only packages with a large impact in terms of rebuilds (as calculated by > `guix refresh -l `). Obviously gcc is one such package. > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-10/msg00933.html Thanks! That is exactly the information I was looking for. > Most changes go to 'master' first and are later merged into > 'core-updates'. However, changes that would force a large number of > rebuilds need to be pushed to another branch, to allow our build farm to > rebuild before its merged to 'master'. Understood, makes a lot of sense. > If you are porting to a new architecture, I would definitely recommend > basing your work on 'core-updates', which will likely be merged into > 'master' in the next two weeks. If you need gcc-4.9.4, that's another > reason to base your work on 'core-updates'. I am (I think) almost there, I expect to be able to succesfully build hello on my ppc machine soon (it's a slow machine, so iterations take time). I do not feel like changing to core-updates now (though I would have been better had I worked there since the beggining). Once I have bootstrapped, I will review the changes and rebase the "core" ones to core-updates. I should be there before two weeks' time. Thanks! Carlos