Re: avoid wrapper scripts when possible

2017-11-05 Thread Ricardo Wurmus
Christopher Baines writes: > However, I think that the file wrapping approach has advantages for > visibility. Maybe it could be tweaked to keep ensure the wrapper script > has the same name as the script its wrapping, e.g. when wrapping foo, > replace foo with a bash script, and move the real s

Re: avoid wrapper scripts when possible

2017-11-05 Thread Hartmut Goebel
Hi, answering on a mail which Ricardo CCed to me and which did not make it to the list yet. Thus I full-quote. Am 04.11.2017 um 23:30 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus: > How about this: > > --8<---cut here---start->8--- > #!/home/rekado/.guix-profile/bin/guile --no-auto-

Re: avoid wrapper scripts when possible

2017-11-05 Thread Hartmut Goebel
Hi, Ricado proposed a new and better solution already. Nevertheless I want to comment on this proposal, sint it includes a pitfall and would not work: Am 03.11.2017 um 22:17 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus: > exec /home/rekado/.guix-profile/bin/python > <(/run/current-system/profile/bin/tail -n +4 "$0")

Re: NFS mounts

2017-11-05 Thread Konrad Hinsen
Hi Ludo, > By default, file systems are automatically mounted at boot time. To > avoid that, you must add: > > (mount? #f) That works well indeed. But I actually want that NFS filesystem mounted at boot time, ideally (not strictly required though). Of course, the real problem is that I cannot

avoid downloading bootstrap binaries?

2017-11-05 Thread Ricardo Wurmus
Hi Guix, we have some Makefile rules that download some bootstrap binaries for us. Why is this necessary? Could we ship these bootstrap binaries instead? -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://elephly.net

Re: Building Docker images of GuixSD

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! Chris Marusich skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: [...] >> Or we mount the host store over 9p and exec a dynamically-linked Guile >> from there. > > I understand hat by "9p" you mean to share the file system with the VM, > but I don't quite understand what this option entail

Re: GDM status (again)

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! Timothy Sample skribis: > Andy Wingo writes: > >>> Do we really need a compile-time dependency (GDM in master doesn’t >>> depend on gnome-shell, after all), or can we just have a hard-coded >>> /run/current-system/bin/gnome-shell somewhere? Granted, that’s not very >>> elegant, but it migh

Re: Status update on reproducible builds in Guix

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Jan Nieuwenhuizen skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >> Here’s an update on reproducibility in Guix: >> >> >> https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/news/reproducible-builds-a-status-update.html > > At least 78% to possibly 91% reproduciblility of packages is not bad. > > Is there a (small) core

Re: why is linux-libre-headers behind linux-libre?

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, Dave Love skribis: > Efraim Flashner writes: > >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 02:00:35PM +0100, Vincent Legoll wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Dave Love wrote: >>> > Why is linux-libre-headers a long way behind linux-libre (currently at >>> > version 4.4.47, comp

Re: Tiny Guix (and containers)

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Dave Love skribis: > Pjotr Prins writes: > >> But, really, I think when talking embedded systems and containers we >> all want tiny. Even HPC can benefit. Tiny containers may be an >> attractive proposition. > > Yes, containers aside, dependencies in Guix are one of the reasons I'm > currently u

Re: Tiny Guix (and containers)

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Heya, Dave Love skribis: > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Hi, >> >> Hartmut Goebel skribis: > >>> I'm in favor of (automatically?) splitting of "development" packages, >>> including the headers and the static libs (much like the "-devel" or >>> "-dev" packages in other distribution

Re: [bootstrappable] diverse double compilation: using $ORIGIN?

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Jan Nieuwenhuizen skribis: > From c91609e847066c384826d726033146e08d8185ed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen > Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 06:52:46 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add clang-gcc, gcc-ddc. WIP > > Usage: guix build gcc-dcc > > Building gcc-dcc tests the diverse double co

Re: [bootstrappable] diverse double compilation: using $ORIGIN?

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello! Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > When building packages, Guix embeds the absolute file name of the output > directory in the resulting binary. That’s usually fine and what we > want. > > Now let’s assume that we’d like to build the GCC sources with diverse > double compilation: we’d have a “gcc

Re: Disable gnulib's test-lock test in packages?

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! Eric Bavier skribis: > I ran the gnulib lock tests with the be95b17ae commit and the tests passed, > then with the commit directly before and they failed; so I'm fairly confident. Great, thanks for testing. > Attached is an updated patch, which remove the *-gnulib-multi-core patches > an

Re: [bootstrappable] diverse double compilation: using $ORIGIN?

2017-11-05 Thread Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Ludovic Courtès writes: >> Usage: guix build gcc-dcc >> >> Building gcc-dcc tests the diverse double compilation property >> of the gcc that Guix is using. >> >> * gnu/packages/bootstrappable.scm: New file. >> * gnu/local.mk (GNU_SYSTEM_MODULES): Add it. > > Awesome! Does it build fine out-of-the

Re: avoid wrapper scripts when possible

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi! Hartmut Goebel skribis: > answering on a mail which Ricardo CCed to me and which did not make it > to the list yet. Thus I full-quote. > > Am 04.11.2017 um 23:30 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus: >> How about this: >> >> --8<---cut here---start->8--- >> #!/home/reka

Re: NFS mounts

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Konrad Hinsen skribis: >> By default, file systems are automatically mounted at boot time. To >> avoid that, you must add: >> >> (mount? #f) > > That works well indeed. But I actually want that NFS filesystem mounted > at boot time, ideally (not strictly required though). > > Of course, t

Re: avoid downloading bootstrap binaries?

2017-11-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > we have some Makefile rules that download some bootstrap binaries for > us. Why is this necessary? Could we ship these bootstrap binaries > instead? These makefile rules were here mostly so that the tarball is not too big. They are gone now in ‘core-updates’:

Re: Status update on reproducible builds in Guix

2017-11-05 Thread Gábor Boskovits
Yesteday we had a discussion about that on irc. Here it goes: [15:15:16] hello guix! [15:16:01] do we have a proposed way to build pyc files reproducibly? [15:16:50] I've read in the report, that we are not there yet, but is someone working on it? [15:17:58] g_bor: This is the report you ment

Re: Status update on reproducible builds in Guix

2017-11-05 Thread Hartmut Goebel
Am 05.11.2017 um 20:04 schrieb Gábor Boskovits: > [15:37:41]At this stage we might as well wait for this to land > upstream: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0552/ Bad news: PEP 552 proposes a new file-format for .pyc file, so this change can not be back-ported to Python 3.6 and older. -- Reg

Re: Status update on reproducible builds in Guix

2017-11-05 Thread ng0
Gábor Boskovits transcribed 5.3K bytes: > Yesteday we had a discussion about that on irc. > Here it goes: > > > [15:15:16] hello guix! > [15:16:01] do we have a proposed way to build pyc files > reproducibly? > [15:16:50] I've read in the report, that we are not there yet, but > is someone wor

Re: 01/01: gnu: itstool: Update to 2.0.4.

2017-11-05 Thread Kei Kebreau
Marius Bakke writes: > Kei Kebreau writes: > >> kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master >> in repository guix. >> >> commit 13fbd174b5ffe5c2cc59e637f7859d357ab33d97 >> Author: Kei Kebreau >> Date: Thu Nov 2 15:33:08 2017 -0400 >> >> gnu: itstool: Update to 2.0.4. >> >> * gnu/pa