From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add Mlucas. Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 21:31:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87mvvvdcaa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20151005130123.2091f6e4@debian> <878u7hmw2w.fsf@openmailbox.org> <87bnccpb3i.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32845) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZjXxU-0007r7-2i for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 15:31:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZjXxQ-0004j8-Ne for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 15:31:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Alex Vong's message of "Tue, 6 Oct 2015 21:58:45 +0800") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Alex Vong Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi! Alex Vong skribis: > On 06/10/2015, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: [...] >> It=E2=80=99s not uncommon, indeed. However, the details on how to boots= trap are >> not standard: Often =E2=80=98autoreconf -vfi=E2=80=99 will do, sometimes= it=E2=80=99s >> =E2=80=98./bootstrap=E2=80=99, sometimes =E2=80=98./autogen.sh=E2=80=99,= etc. >> >> Now the proposed build system could maybe try these variants one after >> the other. >> >> Also, the set of dependencies varies: sometimes it=E2=80=99s Autoconf, s= ometimes >> Autoconf+Automake, sometimes Autoconf+Automake+Libtool, etc. So I think >> the set of dependencies should be kept explicit=E2=80=93i.e., packages h= ave to >> add stuff to =E2=80=98native-inputs=E2=80=99. >> >> Could you try to make this build system as a standalone commit, leaving >> out the build flags code for a separate discussion? >> >> The commit would add (guix build-system gnu-bootstrap) for instance (I >> call it this way because it bootstraps specifically the GNU build >> system, not CMake, etc.) and (guix build gnu-bootstrap-build-system). >> The latter would simply add one phase to =E2=80=98%standard-phases=E2=80= =99. >> >> Does that make sense? >> > I think if the set of dependencies should be kept explicit, then it > seems the only thing we are left to abstract away is trying the > commands ``autoreconf -vfi'', ``./bootstrap'' and ``./autogen.sh''. > But I think the command is better left for the package maintainer to > decide since the bootstrap script may have unusual name. (I have seen > ``bootstrap.sh'' for instance.) My original though is to let the > package maintainer to pass in the bootstrap command string. However, > if it is the case, then gnu-bootstrap build-system isn't abstracting > anything at all. So I think I'll go back to the original solution of > adding a new phase and specifying autotools dependencies instead. Yeah, makes sense. A phase that guesses the command to run may still save a few lines here and there, but I agree that it may not be that beneficial overall. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.