[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on ar
From: |
Mark H Weaver |
Subject: |
Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf. |
Date: |
Mon, 02 Jul 2018 13:29:19 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Marius,
address@hidden (Marius Bakke) writes:
> mbakke pushed a commit to branch staging
> in repository guix.
>
> commit cb4b508cd68df89bfbd5255a0c5569f8318ad50f
> Author: Marius Bakke <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon Jul 2 12:07:58 2018 +0200
>
> build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.
>
> This follows up commit d5b5a15a4046362377f1a45d466b43bb6e93d4f which
> doesn't
> work because %current-system etc expands before the actual build.
I'm disappointed by this workaround that simply removes the
'fix-runpath' phase on armhf. Is that phase needed, or is it truly
optional? What does the phase accomplish, and how will armhf users be
disadvantaged by the removal of that phase?
This feels like "sweeping the problem under the rug" to me.
> Fixes <https://bugs.gnu.org/31719>.
I don't see the connection between that bug and this commit.
How does this commit fix that bug?
Thanks,
Mark
- Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.,
Mark H Weaver <=
- Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf., Marius Bakke, 2018/07/02
- Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf., Mark H Weaver, 2018/07/03
- Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf., Ludovic Courtès, 2018/07/04
- RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Mark H Weaver, 2018/07/04
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Kei Kebreau, 2018/07/04
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Ludovic Courtès, 2018/07/05
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Kei Kebreau, 2018/07/05
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Jonathan Brielmaier, 2018/07/05
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Andreas Enge, 2018/07/05
- Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.), Ricardo Wurmus, 2018/07/05