Message ID | 20200306104108.19503-1-ludo@gnu.org |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Hey! > Thoughts? > > Besides, ‘with-parameters’ is the dual of what was discussed at > <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/29296>. Super nice! Maybe you could add a test-case involving %current-target-system but otherwise this LGTM. Do you think we could use this to get around this issue we discussed there: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-12/msg00099.html. Thanks, Mathieu
Hi Mathieu, Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com> skribis: >> Thoughts? >> >> Besides, ‘with-parameters’ is the dual of what was discussed at >> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/29296>. > > Super nice! Maybe you could add a test-case involving > %current-target-system but otherwise this LGTM. Done and pushed as cf2ac04f13d9266c7c8a2ebd2e85ef593231ac9d. > Do you think we could use this to get around this issue we discussed > there: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-12/msg00099.html. It could be use to achieve the same result as the <native-qemu> package you proposed: #~(… #+(with-parameters ((%current-system %system)) qemu) …) However, the issue I mentioned before with this approach remain: […] now the result of: guix system build -s armhf-linux -d … would be dependent on the actual system type. In other words, the result would be different if you run it on armhf-linux, if you run it on x86_64-linux, or if you run it on i686-linux. Not great. Thanks for your feedback! Ludo’.