Hi,
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
>> I've had this experience before, it's very confusing (it goes on trying
>> to build a toolchain for something that is sure to fail). Perhaps we
>> could at least have a place to refer to in the manual for the common GNU
>> triplets which make the most sense in f
Hi Maxim,
Maxim Cournoyer skribis:
> [...]
>
>> I see, yeah, I eventually figured out that aarch64 was what I was
>> supposed to be using (I think I was reading
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Tuples when I realized this).
>>
>> However, what confuses me still was that 'arm64-linux' did wor
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 10:00, Mathieu Othacehe wrote:
> > I've had this experience before, it's very confusing (it goes on trying
> > to build a toolchain for something that is sure to fail). Perhaps we
> > could at least have a place to refer to in the manual for the common GNU
> > triplets
Hello,
> I've had this experience before, it's very confusing (it goes on trying
> to build a toolchain for something that is sure to fail). Perhaps we
> could at least have a place to refer to in the manual for the common GNU
> triplets which make the most sense in for GNU Guix (e.g., the curr
Hi Christopher,
[...]
> I see, yeah, I eventually figured out that aarch64 was what I was
> supposed to be using (I think I was reading
> https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Tuples when I realized this).
>
> However, what confuses me still was that 'arm64-linux' did work as a
> system type: A bunch
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hi,
>
> Christopher Rodriguez skribis:
>
>> Reporting this from my local installs of GNU Cuirass, though a cursory
>> glance at
>> ci.guix.gnu.org (likely) shows the same issue:
>>
>> GNU Cuirass currently reports both `armhf-linux` and `arm64-linux` targets as
>> `a
Hi,
Christopher Rodriguez skribis:
> Reporting this from my local installs of GNU Cuirass, though a cursory glance
> at
> ci.guix.gnu.org (likely) shows the same issue:
>
> GNU Cuirass currently reports both `armhf-linux` and `arm64-linux` targets as
> `armhf-linux` on the web interface.
There
Hi Christopher,
Tl;dr: [Meta-Reply]
I think IWBN if a busy volunteer like yourself could add
a cookie in an email like yours that would automatically
provide a "heads-up" to readers of the documentation you
intend to patch.
The idea is that emails could be automatically scanned for
such cookies/
Reporting this from my local installs of GNU Cuirass, though a cursory glance at
ci.guix.gnu.org (likely) shows the same issue:
GNU Cuirass currently reports both `armhf-linux` and `arm64-linux` targets as
`armhf-linux` on the web interface.
This is not only incorrect, but potentially confusing t
