GNU bug report logs -
#48314
[PATCH] Install guix system on Raspberry Pi
Previous Next
Reported by: Stefan <stefan-guix <at> vodafonemail.de>
Date: Sun, 9 May 2021 15:33:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 2021-11-13, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 3/8] * gnu/packages/bootloader.scm (make-u-boot-package): Add
> keyword parameters 'name' and 'description'.
> ...
> (u-boot-rpi-0-w, u-boot-rpi, u-boot-rpi-2, u-boot-rpi-3,
> u-boot-rpi-4, u-boot-rpi-64, u-boot-rpi-0-w-efi, u-boot-rpi-efi,
> u-boot-rpi-2-efi, u-boot-rpi-3-efi, u-boot-rpi-4-efi, u-boot-rpi-efi-64): New
> packages.
...
> +(define-public u-boot-rpi-64
> + (make-preinstalled-u-boot-package
> + "rpi_arm64"
> + "aarch64-linux-gnu"
> + #:name "rpi-64"
> + #:description %u-boot-rpi-description-64-bit))
>
> And this "u-boot-rpi-arm64".
>
> In other words, keep names consistent with the upstream defconfig they
> are based on.
...
> I think without addressing the rest of the patch series, adding to guix
> master the following packages could make the remaining diff smaller:
>
> u-boot-rpi-2 (rpi_2_defconfig)
> u-boot-rpi-3-32b (rpi_3_32b_defconfig)
> u-boot-rpi-4-32b (rpi_4_32b_defconfig)
> u-boot-rpi-arm64 (rpi_arm64_defconfig)
Patch that builds, but haven't tested on an actual board (do have rpi2
and rpi3b+ could test sometime):
diff --git a/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm b/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
index 706ddf0207..f5a3fd51e0 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/bootloaders.scm
@@ -994,6 +994,18 @@ (define-public u-boot-pinebook-pro-rk3399
`(("firmware" ,arm-trusted-firmware-rk3399)
,@(package-native-inputs base))))))
+(define-public u-boot-rpi-2
+ (make-u-boot-package "rpi_2" "arm-linux-gnueabihf"))
+
+(define-public u-boot-rpi-3-32b
+ (make-u-boot-package "rpi_3_32b" "arm-linux-gnueabihf"))
+
+(define-public u-boot-rpi-4-32b
+ (make-u-boot-package "rpi_4_32b" "arm-linux-gnueabihf"))
+
+(define-public u-boot-rpi-arm64
+ (make-u-boot-package "rpi_arm64" "aarch64-linux-gnu"))
+
(define-public vboot-utils
(package
(name "vboot-utils")
Which leads me to wonder, why have the name and description argument at
all, when you could just inherit and set the name, like done with the
boneblack?
(define-public u-boot-am335x-boneblack
(let ((base (make-u-boot-package "am335x_evm" "arm-linux-gnueabihf")))
(package
(inherit base)
(name "u-boot-am335x-boneblack")
(description "U-Boot is a bootloader used mostly for ARM
boards. It also initializes the boards (RAM etc).
...
And of course, thanks for working on this! :)
live well,
vagrant
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 165 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.