From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: gzochi: Update to 0.10. Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:44:52 -0400 Message-ID: <87mvk34bxn.fsf@netris.org> References: <874m6dsa5l.fsf@netris.org> <87a8g45ae8.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcFmD-0003Vf-L7 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:46:18 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcFm8-0000Ir-Kj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:46:16 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([50.252.239.5]:46328) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcFm8-0000Ih-Gb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:46:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Julian Graham's message of "Tue, 23 Aug 2016 11:11:00 -0400") 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: Julian Graham Cc: guix-devel Julian Graham writes: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote: >> If you have 'guix' installed, you can run: >> >> guix build --system=i686-linux --keep-failed gzochi >> >> to reproduce the same build on your machine, and to leave the failed >> build directory in /tmp/guix-build-* for further investigation. > > Neat! I'll give that a shot. > > >> If you can fix the problem on i686, please let me know and I'd be glad >> to test the same fix on armhf. >> >> What do you think? > > Will do. From a Guix perspective, what's better: A new gzochi release > or a patch for Guix to apply against the 0.10 release? Either one would be fine for Guix users. However, for the sake of non-Guix users and other distros, I would suggest making a new release. I think it's important that upstream software releases should be reasonably portable whenever feasible, especially to important architectures like i686 and armhf. What do you think? Mark