guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hello from powerpc


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: Hello from powerpc
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 15:47:47 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)

Hello Carlos!

address@hidden (Carlos Sánchez de La Lama) skribis:

> Slowly progressing, quite busy with lately. I will try to address
> pending comments on patches I already sent (and which are required for
> powerpc support) before sending the new ones. There is nothing really
> complex, the patches are rather simple (as usual, once you know what to
> patch ;) )

:-)

>> Ideally we’d provide binaries for that architecture, but for that we’d
>> need at the very least two build machines.  Do you have an idea as how
>> we could get donations for that?  Perhaps we could discuss it with the
>> Talos folks, they may be interested in having more free software
>> developers working on PPC.
>
> I don't really have any ideas. I work in a tech startup which has
> nothing to do with GUIX, so no luck here. My interest in GUIX is purely
> personal. About asking the Talos people, I wonder how much sense it does
> as their product is powerpc64 and what I have bootstrapped is
> powerpc32. I feel powerpc32 is almost dead now (I even read today Debian
> is dropping support on next Debian 9) so it only has interest for those
> having an old machine around. It might have some users on the embedded
> market (there are still some FPGAs with powerpc cores inside AFAIK), but
> I wont expect getting much industrial support/donations.

OK, fine.  So maybe we’ll keep it as an unofficial port, until/unless we
find out that there’s more demand that we thought out there.

>> If we fail to do that, I think we’ll can still have the patches in but
>> prominently mark the platform as “unofficially supported” or something
>> along these lines (like Debian does).  If after a couple of years the
>> situation hasn’t improved, we might want to discuss whether to drop
>> it.
>
> That would be enough, for starters, I think. Making it "unofficially
> supported" and see how much interest it brings. Maybe Debian dropping
> powerpc support makes all those powerpc users around look at GUIX to
> keep their systems up-to-date.

OK!

>> Does cross-compilation to powerpc-linux-gnu work in current master?
>> If/when it does, we can ask Hydra to cross-build a few things, like we
>> already do for other targets:
>
> Not in current master, I think. At least some minor patches are
> required. Anyways, rebuilding the bootstrap binaries is not so hard
> (they are cross-build, so I do it in a bigger x86 machine), but
> everytime the bootstrap binaries change, everything must be rebuilt on
> the target machine as they are root to all dependency graphs (am I
> correct on this?). That's why I would like to "fix" the bootstrap
> binaries (like on current supported targets, where bootstrap binaries
> were generated some time ago and actual binaries have not changed
> since).
>
> In any case, I think first step is have the patches needed for bootstrap
> generation in master, then generate the binaries, and at that point we
> can fix them.

Sure, I’ll wait for the patches then.  :-)

When we’re done, I think it’d be great if you could write a blog entry
for the web site to report on your experience porting Guix, and to
encourage interested hackers into using the port and contributing to it.

Thanks!

Ludo’.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]