Guile 2.0 in make-bootstrap.scm

Guile 2.0 in make-bootstrap.scm

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Janneke!

While uploading the powerpc64le-linux tarballs, I noticed they use Guile
2.0, which reminded me of eef44fea17a735d2f4048a747d16af478d4b9dbc:

    Revert "gnu: guile-static-stripped: Update to 2.2."
    
    As discussed on IRC, keeping bootstrap Guile on 2.0 simplifies adding new
    architectures and removes the need for parameterizing
    gnu/packages/bootstrap.scm.
    
    This reverts commit 2acfe022a740f79b593348cc6362cc4ee8f33bb4.
    
    * gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm (%guile-static): Revert to guile-2.0.  Retain
    build recipe.
    * gnu/packages/patches/guile-relocatable.patch: Update for Guile 2.0.14.

Do you remember the reason for this change?

What’s surprising is that
<https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guix/bootstrap/i686-linux/20190815> does use
2.2.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: Guile 2.0 in make-bootstrap.scm

[Efraim Flashner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1356 bytes --]

On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 10:01:15AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Janneke!
> 
> While uploading the powerpc64le-linux tarballs, I noticed they use Guile
> 2.0, which reminded me of eef44fea17a735d2f4048a747d16af478d4b9dbc:
> 
>     Revert "gnu: guile-static-stripped: Update to 2.2."
>     
>     As discussed on IRC, keeping bootstrap Guile on 2.0 simplifies adding new
>     architectures and removes the need for parameterizing
>     gnu/packages/bootstrap.scm.
>     
>     This reverts commit 2acfe022a740f79b593348cc6362cc4ee8f33bb4.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm (%guile-static): Revert to guile-2.0.  Retain
>     build recipe.
>     * gnu/packages/patches/guile-relocatable.patch: Update for Guile 2.0.14.
> 
> Do you remember the reason for this change?
> 
> What’s surprising is that
> <https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guix/bootstrap/i686-linux/20190815> does use
> 2.2.
> 

That wasn't me? (I apparently touch everything) I remember guile-2.2 for
the bootstrap had (likely) endianness ordering issues with PPC32, and it
was far simpler to revert back to guile-2.0 than to try to fix it.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: Guile 2.0 in make-bootstrap.scm

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Ludovic Courtès writes:

Hello Ludo!
>
> While uploading the powerpc64le-linux tarballs, I noticed they use Guile
> 2.0, which reminded me of eef44fea17a735d2f4048a747d16af478d4b9dbc:
>
>     Revert "gnu: guile-static-stripped: Update to 2.2."
>     
>     As discussed on IRC, keeping bootstrap Guile on 2.0 simplifies adding new
>     architectures and removes the need for parameterizing
>     gnu/packages/bootstrap.scm.
>     
>     This reverts commit 2acfe022a740f79b593348cc6362cc4ee8f33bb4.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/make-bootstrap.scm (%guile-static): Revert to guile-2.0.  Retain
>     build recipe.
>     * gnu/packages/patches/guile-relocatable.patch: Update for Guile 2.0.14.
>
> Do you remember the reason for this change?

I remember we hesitated gratuitously updating the %bootstrap-guile seed
(to 2.2) and decided to try to "make it work without updating the guile
seed".

I am not 100% sure, we'd have to look up the IRC discussions.

> What’s surprising is that
> <https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guix/bootstrap/i686-linux/20190815> does use
> 2.2.

Oh, that's weird.  Well, we used gule-2.2 until almost the very last
moment, I remember.  I am cc'ing Timothy, as he helped make the
guile-2.0 bootstrap possible (gash compatibility and such).

Greetings,
Janneke

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.com

Re: Guile 2.0 in make-bootstrap.scm

[Timothy Sample]

Hi all,

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> writes:

>> What’s surprising is that
>> <https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guix/bootstrap/i686-linux/20190815> does use
>> 2.2.
>
> Oh, that's weird.  Well, we used gule-2.2 until almost the very last
> moment, I remember.  I am cc'ing Timothy, as he helped make the
> guile-2.0 bootstrap possible (gash compatibility and such).

Unfortunately, I can’t be too much help here.  Like janneke, I think
it’s weird that it’s 2.2.  We had a discussion about upgrading the seed
Guile, and all I remember is that we decided it would be preferable if
we didn’t.  Maybe this is what I’m remembering:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-12/msg00154.html

Anyway, I did extensive testing to make sure the Gash stuff all works
with bootstrap Guile (version 2.0.9).  AFAIK, there’s no reason we need
2.2.


-- Tim