GNU bug report logs - #33976
[PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 33976 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 33976 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.
Date: Fri,  4 Jan 2019 18:24:14 +0100

* gnu/packages/assembly.scm (dev86): New variable.
---
 gnu/packages/assembly.scm | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/assembly.scm b/gnu/packages/assembly.scm
index 763d183cf..63f799f41 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/assembly.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/assembly.scm
@@ -122,3 +122,37 @@ abstracts over the target CPU by exposing a standardized RISC instruction set
 to the clients.")
     (home-page "https://www.gnu.org/software/lightning/")
     (license license:gpl3+)))
+
+(define-public dev86
+  (package
+    (name "dev86")
+    (version "0.16.21")
+    (source (origin
+             (method url-fetch)
+             (uri (string-append "http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/dev86/Dev86src-"
+                                 version ".tar.gz"))
+             (sha256
+              (base32
+               "154dyr2ph4n0kwi8yx0n78j128kw29rk9r9f7s2gddzrdl712jr3"))))
+    (build-system gnu-build-system)
+    (arguments
+     `(#:make-flags (list "-j" "1" ; They use submakes wrong
+                          "CC=gcc"
+                          (string-append "PREFIX="
+                                         (assoc-ref %outputs "out")))
+       #:system "i686-linux" ; Standalone ld86 had problems otherwise
+       #:tests? #f ; No tests exist
+       #:phases
+       (modify-phases %standard-phases
+        (delete 'configure)
+        (add-before 'install 'mkdir
+          (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
+            (let ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out")))
+              (mkdir-p (string-append out "/bin"))
+              (mkdir-p (string-append out "/man/man1"))
+              #t))))))
+    (synopsis "X86 16-bit assembler, C compiler and linker")
+    (description "This package provides a X86 16-bit assembler, a C compiler
+and a linker.")
+    (home-page "https://github.com/jbruchon/dev86")
+    (license license:gpl2)))

Message #8 received at 33976 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 33976 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#33976] [PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 17:21:59 +0100

Hi,

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:

> * gnu/packages/assembly.scm (dev86): New variable.

[...]

> +    (arguments
> +     `(#:make-flags (list "-j" "1" ; They use submakes wrong

Maybe #:parallel-build? #f for clarity.

> +       #:system "i686-linux" ; Standalone ld86 had problems otherwise

Please add ‘supported-systems’ accordingly.

> +       #:tests? #f ; No tests exist
> +       #:phases
> +       (modify-phases %standard-phases
> +        (delete 'configure)
> +        (add-before 'install 'mkdir
> +          (lambda* (#:key outputs #:allow-other-keys)
> +            (let ((out (assoc-ref outputs "out")))
> +              (mkdir-p (string-append out "/bin"))
> +              (mkdir-p (string-append out "/man/man1"))
> +              #t))))))
> +    (synopsis "X86 16-bit assembler, C compiler and linker")
> +    (description "This package provides a X86 16-bit assembler, a C compiler
> +and a linker.")

s/X86/Intel 8086/, no?

It’d be nice to add a few words about what’s special about this
toolchain (not obvious from their README…).

> +    (home-page "https://github.com/jbruchon/dev86")
> +    (license license:gpl2)))

There are no headers in source files so it should be gpl2+.

OK with these changes, thank you!

Ludo’.

Message #11 received at 33976 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 33976 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#33976] [PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 19:34:10 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

> It’d be nice to add a few words about what’s special about this
> toolchain (not obvious from their README…).

It's primarily 16-bit.  I package it because of xen which uses it to compile
old-school BIOSes.

It was quite popular in 1990 and used even by the Linux kernel.

Nowadays, few projects still use it. 

I pushed it as 1bde3d2cbf311f6d6c733339a000b7395cb2f945.

Please amend description if necessary.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #16 received at 33976-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 33976-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#33976] [PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:31:55 +0100

Hello,

Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org> skribis:

> It's primarily 16-bit.  I package it because of xen which uses it to compile
> old-school BIOSes.
>
> It was quite popular in 1990 and used even by the Linux kernel.

Oh, fun.

> I pushed it as 1bde3d2cbf311f6d6c733339a000b7395cb2f945.

Thanks!

> Please amend description if necessary.

I’m not in a good position to do that because I know too little about
it.  In general, I don’t think the burden should be on the reviewer—we
already have too few people reviewing patches.

Ludo’.

Message #19 received at 33976-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 33976-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#33976] [PATCH] gnu: Add dev86.
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 14:01:02 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ludo,

On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:31:55 +0100
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > Please amend description if necessary.  
> 
> I’m not in a good position to do that because I know too little about
> it.  In general, I don’t think the burden should be on the reviewer—we
> already have too few people reviewing patches.

I agree!  I had already extended the description.  I meant don't hesitate to
edit it further if you want to.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.