GNU bug report logs - #50778
[PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported systems.

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 50778 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 50778 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: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: ludo <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported systems.
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 16:39:41 +0300

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

* m4/guix.m4 (GUIX_ASSERT_SUPPORTED_SYSTEM): Don't error if building on
an unsupported system.
* doc/guix.texi (GNU Distribution): Relabel mips64el-linux as
unsupported.
---

As we discussed previously with the powerpc-linux patches, I've gotten
around to changing the m4 error to a warning. Also, I didn't change
i586-gnu to say unsupported next to it in GNU Distribution in the
manual, although I suppose the other option would be to add i586-gnu to
supported in m4/guix.m4.

---
 doc/guix.texi |  2 +-
 m4/guix.m4    | 17 +++--------------
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index 9bb91b94fd..5cec6c0645 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -525,7 +525,7 @@ way for you to give it a try is by setting up an instance of
 (@pxref{transparent-emulation-qemu, @code{hurd-vm-service-type}}).
 @xref{Contributing}, on how to help!
 
-@item mips64el-linux (deprecated)
+@item mips64el-linux (unsupported)
 little-endian 64-bit MIPS processors, specifically the Loongson series,
 n32 ABI, and Linux-Libre kernel.  This configuration is no longer fully
 supported; in particular, there is no ongoing work to ensure that this
diff --git a/m4/guix.m4 b/m4/guix.m4
index 05d409a674..7a5eaa47f9 100644
--- a/m4/guix.m4
+++ b/m4/guix.m4
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 dnl GNU Guix --- Functional package management for GNU
 dnl Copyright © 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
 dnl Copyright © 2014 Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
-dnl Copyright © 2017 Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
+dnl Copyright © 2017, 2021 Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
 dnl Copyright © 2021 Chris Marusich <cmmarusich <at> gmail.com>
 dnl
 dnl This file is part of GNU Guix.
@@ -79,25 +79,14 @@ dnl Assert that this is a system to which the distro is ported.
 AC_DEFUN([GUIX_ASSERT_SUPPORTED_SYSTEM], [
   AC_REQUIRE([GUIX_SYSTEM_TYPE])
 
-  AC_ARG_WITH([courage], [AS_HELP_STRING([--with-courage],
-    [Assert that even if this platform is unsupported, you will be
-courageous and port the GNU System distribution to it (see
-"GNU Distribution" in the manual.)])],
-    [guix_courageous="$withval"],
-    [guix_courageous="no"])
-
   # Currently only Linux-based systems are supported, and only on some
   # platforms.
   case "$guix_system" in
     x86_64-linux|i686-linux|armhf-linux|aarch64-linux|powerpc64le-linux)
       ;;
     *)
-      if test "x$guix_courageous" = "xyes"; then
-        AC_MSG_WARN([building Guix on `$guix_system', which is not supported])
-      else
-        AC_MSG_ERROR([`$guix_system' is not a supported platform.
-See "GNU Distribution" in the manual, or try `--with-courage'.])
-      fi
+      AC_MSG_WARN([`$guix_system' IS NOT A SUPPORTED PLATFORM.
+See "GNU Distribution" in the manual, for more information.])
       ;;
   esac
 ])

base-commit: a7b6c5a1270e52385a70b4192ee40ac6eb3b7c27
-- 
2.33.0

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#50778: [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 11:00:16 +0200

Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:

> * m4/guix.m4 (GUIX_ASSERT_SUPPORTED_SYSTEM): Don't error if building on
> an unsupported system.
> * doc/guix.texi (GNU Distribution): Relabel mips64el-linux as
> unsupported.
> ---
>
> As we discussed previously with the powerpc-linux patches, I've gotten
> around to changing the m4 error to a warning. Also, I didn't change
> i586-gnu to say unsupported next to it in GNU Distribution in the
> manual, although I suppose the other option would be to add i586-gnu to
> supported in m4/guix.m4.

Yes, I’d rather mark i586-gnu as supported in m4/guix.m4 (it should have
been the case long ago) and keep the error and ‘--with-courage’ flag.

WDYT?

> -@item mips64el-linux (deprecated)
> +@item mips64el-linux (unsupported)

Good idea.  :-)

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Message #11 received at 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50778] [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 10:20:45 +0300

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

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:00:16AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:
> 
> > * m4/guix.m4 (GUIX_ASSERT_SUPPORTED_SYSTEM): Don't error if building on
> > an unsupported system.
> > * doc/guix.texi (GNU Distribution): Relabel mips64el-linux as
> > unsupported.
> > ---
> >
> > As we discussed previously with the powerpc-linux patches, I've gotten
> > around to changing the m4 error to a warning. Also, I didn't change
> > i586-gnu to say unsupported next to it in GNU Distribution in the
> > manual, although I suppose the other option would be to add i586-gnu to
> > supported in m4/guix.m4.
> 
> Yes, I’d rather mark i586-gnu as supported in m4/guix.m4 (it should have
> been the case long ago) and keep the error and ‘--with-courage’ flag.
> 
> WDYT?

I'm OK with changing i586-gnu to supported in m4/guix.m4. However, part
of the plan was to make it so that we didn't have to have the
--with-courage flag when building for mips64el, and so we could remove
powerpc-linux so it would also say that it is unsupported but we
wouldn't need people to make special versions of the guix package so
they can try to build it. I can make it bigger and flashier, so it looks
more like

****************************************

WARNING: YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO BUILD GUIX ON AN UNSUPPORTED PLATFORM!
PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!!! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! HERE BE DRAGONS!!!!

****************************************

> > -@item mips64el-linux (deprecated)
> > +@item mips64el-linux (unsupported)
> 
> Good idea.  :-)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Ludo’.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #14 received at 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Cc: 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50778] [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 10:43:54 +0200

Hello!

Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:

> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:00:16AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:

[...]

>> Yes, I’d rather mark i586-gnu as supported in m4/guix.m4 (it should have
>> been the case long ago) and keep the error and ‘--with-courage’ flag.
>> 
>> WDYT?
>
> I'm OK with changing i586-gnu to supported in m4/guix.m4. However, part
> of the plan was to make it so that we didn't have to have the
> --with-courage flag when building for mips64el, and so we could remove
> powerpc-linux so it would also say that it is unsupported but we
> wouldn't need people to make special versions of the guix package so
> they can try to build it. I can make it bigger and flashier, so it looks
> more like

Ah!  So I think you’re asking that there be three levels:

  1. Fully supported (should include i586-gnu).

  2. “Half supported” or “in the works”, like mips64el-linux and
     powerpc-linux: in that case, maybe just emit a warning with
     AC_MSG_WARN?

  3. Unsupported: error asking users to pass ‘--with-courage’.

How does that sound?

Ludo’.

Message #17 received at 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50778] [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 15:15:54 +0300

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

On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 10:43:54AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:
> 
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:00:16AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> Yes, I’d rather mark i586-gnu as supported in m4/guix.m4 (it should have
> >> been the case long ago) and keep the error and ‘--with-courage’ flag.
> >> 
> >> WDYT?
> >
> > I'm OK with changing i586-gnu to supported in m4/guix.m4. However, part
> > of the plan was to make it so that we didn't have to have the
> > --with-courage flag when building for mips64el, and so we could remove
> > powerpc-linux so it would also say that it is unsupported but we
> > wouldn't need people to make special versions of the guix package so
> > they can try to build it. I can make it bigger and flashier, so it looks
> > more like
> 
> Ah!  So I think you’re asking that there be three levels:
> 
>   1. Fully supported (should include i586-gnu).
> 
>   2. “Half supported” or “in the works”, like mips64el-linux and
>      powerpc-linux: in that case, maybe just emit a warning with
>      AC_MSG_WARN?
> 
>   3. Unsupported: error asking users to pass ‘--with-courage’.
> 
> How does that sound?

I hadn't really planned on keeping the third category, but thinking
about it more it would make sense to keep it for architectures that we
don't even have bootstrap binaries for. Vagrant said he was able to
build the guix package for riscv64-linux, I think without even adding my
patches for adding the bootstrap binaries. By forcing people to pass
--with-courage it goes past "it doesn't really work" and all the way
into "really really unsupported"

So yes, I like the idea of the three levels.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #20 received at 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Cc: 50778 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50778] [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 12:15:17 +0200

Howdy!

Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:

> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 10:43:54AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:

[...]

>> Ah!  So I think you’re asking that there be three levels:
>> 
>>   1. Fully supported (should include i586-gnu).
>> 
>>   2. “Half supported” or “in the works”, like mips64el-linux and
>>      powerpc-linux: in that case, maybe just emit a warning with
>>      AC_MSG_WARN?
>> 
>>   3. Unsupported: error asking users to pass ‘--with-courage’.
>> 
>> How does that sound?
>
> I hadn't really planned on keeping the third category, but thinking
> about it more it would make sense to keep it for architectures that we
> don't even have bootstrap binaries for. Vagrant said he was able to
> build the guix package for riscv64-linux, I think without even adding my
> patches for adding the bootstrap binaries. By forcing people to pass
> --with-courage it goes past "it doesn't really work" and all the way
> into "really really unsupported"
>
> So yes, I like the idea of the three levels.

Alright.  Can you send (or push) an updated patch?

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Message #25 received at 50778-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, 50778-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#50778] [PATCH] m4: Don't require courage on unsupported
 systems.
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 18:36:48 +0200

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

Finally took care of this today.

On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 03:15:54PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 10:43:54AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Hello!
> > 
> > Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il> skribis:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:00:16AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > >> Yes, I’d rather mark i586-gnu as supported in m4/guix.m4 (it should have
> > >> been the case long ago) and keep the error and ‘--with-courage’ flag.
> > >> 
> > >> WDYT?
> > >
> > > I'm OK with changing i586-gnu to supported in m4/guix.m4. However, part
> > > of the plan was to make it so that we didn't have to have the
> > > --with-courage flag when building for mips64el, and so we could remove
> > > powerpc-linux so it would also say that it is unsupported but we
> > > wouldn't need people to make special versions of the guix package so
> > > they can try to build it. I can make it bigger and flashier, so it looks
> > > more like
> > 
> > Ah!  So I think you’re asking that there be three levels:
> > 
> >   1. Fully supported (should include i586-gnu).
> > 
> >   2. “Half supported” or “in the works”, like mips64el-linux and
> >      powerpc-linux: in that case, maybe just emit a warning with
> >      AC_MSG_WARN?
> > 
> >   3. Unsupported: error asking users to pass ‘--with-courage’.
> > 
> > How does that sound?
> 
> I hadn't really planned on keeping the third category, but thinking
> about it more it would make sense to keep it for architectures that we
> don't even have bootstrap binaries for. Vagrant said he was able to
> build the guix package for riscv64-linux, I think without even adding my
> patches for adding the bootstrap binaries. By forcing people to pass
> --with-courage it goes past "it doesn't really work" and all the way
> into "really really unsupported"
> 
> So yes, I like the idea of the three levels.
> 
> -- 
> Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
> GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
> Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted



-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[signature.asc (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.