Hi, Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 05:55:21PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> > The architecture armf will not be included. >> >> Wait wait, I missed that. What happened? I think we should include it, >> even if substitute availability remains low. > > I had asked about the status of the armhf branch on #guix when a few of > us were trying to "tie up loose ends" for this release. > > I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but since we are not > building substitutes for it at all, we should include in the release > announcement a clear description of the level of support that users can > expect. Right, we could adjust the text in the “GNU Distribution” node of the manual (we did that before when mips64el-linux was supported without substitutes.) Mathieu, what’s preventing us from doing armhf-linux builds again? We could use the OverDrives for that (with an upper bound though), along with the SBCs in machines-for-berlin.scm. That won’t be enough to keep up, so perhaps we’ll have to restrict armhf-linux builds to the “core” subset or the release-manifest.scm. Thoughts? Ludo’.
