From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEL5c-0007I0-JC for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 17:16:49 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEKuE-0003CS-Sc for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 17:05:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58670) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gEKuE-0003CK-Ob for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 17:05:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gEKuE-0002S9-F3 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 17:05:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#33038] [PATCH 3/6] bootstrap: Add %bootstrap-mes. Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <20181014085857.3863-1-janneke@gnu.org> <20181014085857.3863-3-janneke@gnu.org> <87r2gld3nt.fsf@gnu.org> <875zxxax4f.fsf@gnu.org> <87sh0z8294.fsf@fastmail.com> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 23:04:02 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87sh0z8294.fsf@fastmail.com> (Marius Bakke's message of "Sun, 21 Oct 2018 22:37:43 +0200") Message-ID: <877eib8119.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Marius Bakke Cc: 33038@debbugs.gnu.org Marius Bakke skribis: > Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes: > >>> It would be nice to maybe make this a separate commit (following the >>> make-bootstrap.scm changes) so that you can state in the commit log >>> which commit was used to build this binary. >> >> Ah yes, that's nice. Hmm, there's a slight complication because for the >> i686-linux version I cheated; icu4c, python-more-itertools and swig fail >> to build on core-updates-next. I added a hack and reverted that... >> which is probably less than great. So I cleaned it up a bit and just >> added it. > > FYI the issues mentioned here have been fixed in the 'core-updates' > branch. I suppose you can still rebase on it, or just merge it. Merging core-updates into core-updates-next sounds like a good idea. Thanks for letting us know, Marius! Ludo=E2=80=99.