[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01
From: |
Andreas Enge |
Subject: |
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.) |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Jul 2018 21:40:18 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) |
Hello,
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:04:31AM +0200, Jonathan Brielmaier wrote:
> I just want to bring POWER up as a freedom-respecting architecture.
> Especially the TalosII from RaptorCS[0]. I know that guix does not work
> on ppc64le yet, but I'm working for it :) They tend to be quite
> expensive, but you get a decent performance on compiling and packing[1].
this is indeed an exciting architecture. Vikings had a machine on display
at their FOSDEM table earlier this year. But the price is still quite
steep, if you know anybody who would sponsor a machine...
Andreas
- Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf., Mark H Weaver, 2018/07/02
- 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 <=
- 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
- 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.), 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.), 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.), Ludovic Courtès, 2018/07/05
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., Ludovic Courtès, 2018/07/03