[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Global modification of #:make-flags
From: |
Marek Paśnikowski |
Subject: |
Re: Global modification of #:make-flags |
Date: |
Fri, 06 Sep 2024 18:27:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
Good afternoon.
I apologise for late reply — I am still catching up with my digital life
backlog.
> Hi,
>
> Marek Paśnikowski <marek@marekpasnikowski.pl> skribis:
>
>> In order to prevent the XY problem, here is my goal: Rebuild the entire
>> system with -Os optimization level. It is an experiment into viability
>> of hardware-targeted optimizations.
>
> Instead of trying to override #:make-flags, which is likely fragile as
> it depends on details of each package’s build system, I would use a
> strategy similar to that of ‘--tune’.
>
> For ‘--tune’, the ‘tuning-compiler’ procedure in (guix transformations)
> produces a compiler wrapper that passes ‘-march=whatever’, and
> ‘tuned-package’ injects that wrapper in the package of interest.
>
> In fact you could reuse most of the code here to do what you want. And
> we could create a package transformation for ‘-Os’. Could be neat!
I appreciate the pointers about transformations. Did you mean to
suggest to implement a new transformation dedicated to the O levels?
This is how I interpreted your response.
Also, I am still failing to see how I could apply /any/ transformations
to the operating-system records. I admit, I still know little about
sub-surface features of Guix.
In the adjacent message, Sergio Perez mentioned a map-derivation
function. The documentation I found about it is /very/ cryptic.
“Given MAPPING, a list of pairs of derivations, return a derivation
based on DRV where all the 'car's of MAPPING have been replaced by its
'cdr's, recursively.”
Should I get more familiar with this function, if I want to transform
operating-system?
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: Global modification of #:make-flags,
Marek Paśnikowski <=