From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: radoslaw@chmielarz.xyz Subject: Re: Guix and sel4 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:44:08 +0100 Message-ID: <9b985bf236a0f43870259bf105f6f36d@chmielarz.xyz> References: <201801150026.28057.paul@boddie.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37327) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ebBcD-0005rd-Qd for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:44:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ebBcC-0002jL-Hl for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 15:44:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <201801150026.28057.paul@boddie.org.uk> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" To: Paul Boddie Cc: Help-Guix , help-guix@gnu.org Hi, It wasn't entirely what I was hoping for but thank You for answering. So=20 to dig a little deeper how closely is guix connected to linux kernel? In=20 other words what would have to be changed in order to work with a=20 different kernel and therefore different syscalls? I don't mean the=20 whole system but the minimal set. I would assume that a toolchain (make,=20 binutils, gcc), obviously guile if there is anything specific to linux=20 in it. Anything else? Cheers, Radek W dniu 2018-01-15 00:26, Paul Boddie napisa=C5=82(a): > On Sunday 14. January 2018 22.16.39 radoslaw@chmielarz.xyz wrote: >>=20 >> In 2016 David Craven has sent an email about his attempt in using sel4 >> (genode with sel4 to be exact) with guix >> (https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2016-12/msg00058.html).=20 >> Do >> You know if he succeeded or not? And if not where there any=20 >> substantial >> blockers or just lack of time? >=20 > He referenced some work done to use Nix with Genode, since abandoned,=20 > but the > Genode documentation provides more details about this: >=20 > "The design of Genode's package-management concept is largely=20 > influenced by > Git as well as the Nix package manager. In particular the latter opened= =20 > our > eyes to discover the potential that lies beyond the package management > employed in state-of-the art commodity systems. Even though we=20 > considered > adapting Nix for Genode and actually conducted intensive experiments in= =20 > this > direction (thanks to Emery Hemingway who pushed forward this line of=20 > work), we > settled on a custom solution that leverages Genode's holistic view on=20 > all > levels of the operating system including the build system and tooling,=20 > source > structure, ABI design, framework API, system configuration,=20 > inter-component > interaction, and the components itself. Whereby Nix is designed for=20 > being used > on top of Linux, Genode's whole-systems view led us to simplifications=20 > that > eliminated the needs for Nix' powerful features like its custom=20 > description > language." >=20 > http://genode.org/documentation/developer-resources/package_management >=20 > (This is actually quite typical of Genode's online documentation, which= =20 > seems > to have a "white paper" feel at times (and a "manifest" feel, just=20 > summarising > details, at others), so digesting it all can be time-consuming work.) >=20 > Personally, I have spent some time looking at L4Re rather than Genode,=20 > mostly > because I have been wanting to deploy Fiasco.OC and it would appear=20 > that these > two things (L4Re and Fiasco.OC) are developed more closely together.=20 > Genode > seems to bundle specific versions of Fiasco.OC, but I have been needing= =20 > to get > updates and make fixes in a more convenient relationship with=20 > Fiasco.OC's > upstream. >=20 > There was a remark about the Hurd in the previous thread. The one=20 > difference I > tend to perceive between the Hurd and systems like L4Re and Genode is=20 > that the > latter things tend to be demonstrated almost like embedded solutions -=20 > you > build a specific payload and that is your system - whereas the Hurd=20 > behaves > like the open-ended system we are familiar with from our desktop=20 > computers. >=20 > That said, Genode is supposed to be usable as a desktop operating=20 > system, and > will apparently introduce "a minimalistic generic live system that can=20 > be > interactively shaped into a desktop scenario by the user without any=20 > reboot": >=20 > https://genode.org/documentation/release-notes/17.11 >=20 > Another difference, this time between Genode and L4Re, is the way the > components seem to be wired up. Genode appears to use some kind of XML=20 > syntax > for this: >=20 > http://genode.org/documentation/developer-resources/init >=20 > Whereas L4Re employs Lua for the same job. I cannot comment on Genode,=20 > but the > L4Re framework seems to be something of a work in progress. >=20 > A vague goal of mine is to try and bring Fiasco.OC or something similar= =20 > within > the realm of the Hurd again. There was once a project to port the Hurd=20 > to a L4 > microkernel, but that stalled in various ways and also didn't involve=20 > the more > modern L4 variants that are around today and are supported by Genode. >=20 > Sorry if this was something of a digression from the topic! >=20 > Paul