GNU bug report logs - #45021
[PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.

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 45021 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 45021 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: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: dannym <at> scratchpost.org, Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.
Date: Thu,  3 Dec 2020 11:53:52 +0100

* gnu/image.scm (<system>): New field.
* gnu/system/image.scm (arm32-disk-image, arm64-disk-image): Set the system
field.
(system-image): Do not try to cross-compile if we are running on the
appropriate system.
* gnu/system/images/hurd.scm (hurd-disk-image): Set the system field.
---
 gnu/image.scm              |  3 +++
 gnu/system/image.scm       | 12 +++++++++++-
 gnu/system/images/hurd.scm |  1 +
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/image.scm b/gnu/image.scm
index a60d83b175..a56710d540 100644
--- a/gnu/image.scm
+++ b/gnu/image.scm
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
             image
             image-name
             image-format
+            image-system
             image-target
             image-size
             image-operating-system
@@ -77,6 +78,8 @@
   (name               image-name ;symbol
                       (default #f))
   (format             image-format) ;symbol
+  (system             image-system
+                      (default #f))
   (target             image-target
                       (default #f))
   (size               image-size  ;size in bytes as integer
diff --git a/gnu/system/image.scm b/gnu/system/image.scm
index 4972d9067b..f3d5734381 100644
--- a/gnu/system/image.scm
+++ b/gnu/system/image.scm
@@ -131,6 +131,7 @@
 (define arm32-disk-image
   (image
    (format 'disk-image)
+   (system "armhf-linux")
    (target "arm-linux-gnueabihf")
    (partitions
     (list (partition
@@ -143,6 +144,7 @@
 (define arm64-disk-image
   (image
    (inherit arm32-disk-image)
+   (system "aarch64-linux")
    (target "aarch64-linux-gnu")))
 
 
@@ -613,7 +615,15 @@ it can be used for bootloading."
   "Return the derivation of IMAGE.  It can be a raw disk-image or an ISO9660
 image, depending on IMAGE format."
   (define substitutable? (image-substitutable? image))
-  (define target (image-target image))
+
+  ;; The image definition may provide the appropriate "system" architecture
+  ;; for the image.  If we are already running on this system, the image can
+  ;; be built natively.  If we are running on a different system, then we need
+  ;; to cross-compile, using the "target" provided by the image definition.
+  (define system (image-system image))
+  (define target (if (eq? system (%current-system))
+                     #f
+                     (image-target image)))
 
   (with-parameters ((%current-target-system target))
     (let* ((os (operating-system-for-image image))
diff --git a/gnu/system/images/hurd.scm b/gnu/system/images/hurd.scm
index 4417952c5d..6e7dbaa7a7 100644
--- a/gnu/system/images/hurd.scm
+++ b/gnu/system/images/hurd.scm
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@
 (define hurd-disk-image
   (image
    (format 'disk-image)
+   (system "i586-gnu")
    (target "i586-pc-gnu")
    (partitions
     (list (partition
-- 
2.29.2

Message #12 received at 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 21:41:30 +0100

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

Hi Mathieu,

On Thu,  3 Dec 2020 11:53:52 +0100
Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> diff --git a/gnu/image.scm b/gnu/image.scm
> index a60d83b175..a56710d540 100644
> --- a/gnu/image.scm
> +++ b/gnu/image.scm
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
>              image
>              image-name
>              image-format
> +            image-system
>              image-target
>              image-size
>              image-operating-system
> @@ -613,7 +615,15 @@ it can be used for bootloading."
>    "Return the derivation of IMAGE.  It can be a raw disk-image or an ISO9660
>  image, depending on IMAGE format."
>    (define substitutable? (image-substitutable? image))
> -  (define target (image-target image))
> +
> +  ;; The image definition may provide the appropriate "system" architecture
> +  ;; for the image.  If we are already running on this system, the image can
> +  ;; be built natively.  If we are running on a different system, then we need
> +  ;; to cross-compile, using the "target" provided by the image definition.
> +  (define system (image-system image))
> +  (define target (if (eq? system (%current-system))

Should be string=? instead of eq?, otherwise it downloads a cross compiler
for armhf on armhf.

With that change, I tested this patchset on armhf--works fine then.

LGTM!

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

Message #15 received at 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:12:13 +0100

Hey Danny,

> Should be string=? instead of eq?, otherwise it downloads a cross compiler
> for armhf on armhf.

I used "eq?" because if "system" is left to its default in some image
definition, then we would end-up comparing "#f" and a string.

> With that change, I tested this patchset on armhf--works fine then.

Thanks for testing!

Mathieu

Message #18 received at 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:01:10 +0100

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

Hi Mathieu,

On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 09:12:13 +0100
Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> I used "eq?" because if "system" is left to its default in some image
> definition, then we would end-up comparing "#f" and a string.

Yeah, but eq? only compares the "addresses" of things, not the content.

(eq? "a" "a") could totally be #f if one is unlucky.

For example try:

(eq? "a" (read))

and enter "a".  The result will be #f.

On the other hand, (equal? "a" "a") would work; also (equal? "a" #f) would
not fail.

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

Message #21 received at 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mathieu Othacehe <othacehe <at> gnu.org>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 45021 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] image: Add system field.
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2020 11:24:22 +0100

Hey Danny,

> On the other hand, (equal? "a" "a") would work; also (equal? "a" #f) would
> not fail.

Oh you're right, I always get confused with those equality procedures even
after all these years. I'll fix it before pushing.

Thanks,

Mathieu

Previous Next

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