GNU bug report logs - #41350
[PATCH 0/3] Use native qemu to build vm-image.

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org>

Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 10:02:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #137 received at 41350 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 41350 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#41350] [PATCH v2 3/3] system: vm: Build vm-image using
 native qemu, for the Hurd.
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 10:18:52 +0200
Hi,

Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org> skribis:

>> But maybe we can just rebase ‘system-qemu-image’ & co. on top of (gnu
>> image)?  What prevents us from doing that, Mathieu?
>>
>> If we can do that, then indeed, there’s no point in insisting on fixing
>> cross-compilation support in (gnu system vm).
>
> I think we could proceed that way:
>
> * Merge Ludo's serie on master.

I think that can wait because on IRC Janneke explained that it doesn’t
fix anything for GNU/Hurd (to my surprise).  So I’ll maybe check again
once the relevant Hurd bits are on master, instead of checking ARM
cross-compilation.

Anyway it’s much less important now that (gnu image) can be used for the
task!

> * Then we could review & merge Jan's wip-hurd-disk.

Do I get it right that we first need
<https://issues.guix.gnu.org/41560>?

The ‘wip-hurd-vm’ branch contains many things:

  1. (gnu system hurd) with the Hurd services etc.

  2. The ‘hurd’ field of <operating-system>.

  3. <menu-entry> with multiboot support.

  4. Hacks to work around vm.scm defects: uses of ‘with-parameters’,
     ‘hurd-target?’, disabling sqlite3, and #~#$ tricks.

I think part of the reason this cycle has been so long is that it’s been
kind of a big bang; big bangs are great because they lead to something
new and exciting, but they’re also intimidating.  :-) For me personally,
looking at all these aspects at once was just too much.

For merging, I think it’d be great to see #1 and #2 as a first step, and
then #3.

I do not want any of #4 :-), because I really think it could lead to
maintenance headaches down the road, which would make the kind of
changes we’re making today practically impossible in the future.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.




This bug report was last modified 2 years and 313 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.