From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jun 12 11:05:10 2020 Received: (at 41785) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jun 2020 15:05:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40440 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jjlF0-0005lg-Dd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:05:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47766) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jjlEz-0005lN-4J for 41785@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:05:09 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37314) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjlEr-0003y9-KE; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:05:01 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:fa:a50:94c:bf7f:8c59:d38d] (port=33316 helo=meru) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jjlEq-0002eE-Ut; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 11:05:01 -0400 From: Mathieu Othacehe To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: Re: [bug#41785] [PATCH] DRAFT services: Add 'hurd-in-vm service-type'. References: <20200610085441.890-1-janneke@gnu.org> <87eeql9xvt.fsf@gnu.org> <87wo4d2rm5.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:04:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87wo4d2rm5.fsf@gnu.org> (Jan Nieuwenhuizen's message of "Thu, 11 Jun 2020 23:57:06 +0200") Message-ID: <873670l3z9.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 41785 Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , 41785@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey janneke, > + (let ((target (%current-target-system))) > + (match file-system-type > + ("iso9660" iso9660-image) > + (_ (cond > + ((and target > + (hurd-triplet? target)) > + hurd-disk-image) > + (else > + efi-disk-image)))))) I think it would be safe to pass a "target" argument. Then the two actual callers could pass (current-target-system) as target argument. This is guaranteed to return a correct value, whereas %current-target-system is not here. > +@lisp > +(service hurd-vm-service-type > + (hurd-vm-configuration > + (disk-size (* 5000 (expt 2 20))) ;5G > + (memory-size 1024))) ;1024MiB That's really nice! We could really use a (guix units) module or so where we would put those definitions: "(define MiB (expt 2 20))". Then we could use: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (service hurd-vm-service-type (hurd-vm-configuration (disk-size (* 5 GiB) (memory-size (* 1024 MiB))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Well, this is really not a blocking thing. > +(define* (disk-image os #:key (image-size 'guess) target) > + "Return a disk-image for OS with size IMAGE-SIZE, built for TARGET." > + (let ((base-image (find-image "ext2"))) > + (system-image > + (image (inherit base-image) > + (size image-size) > + (operating-system > + (with-parameters ((%current-target-system target)) > + os)))))) Yeah then again, I think it would be nice to use something like the "hurd-disk-image" as I proposed here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2020-05/msg00417.html. This way, no need to call "find-image". You could just write: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (define (image os #:key (image-size 'guess)) (image (inherit hurd-disk-image) (size image-size) (operating-system os))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > + (image hurd-vm-configuration-image ;string > + (thunked) Then the thunked field wouldn't be required. Mostly comments related to the fact that (gnu image) needs some polishing, your patches are really nice here :) Thanks, Mathieu