From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Dec 14 05:34:45 2020 Received: (at 41669) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Dec 2020 10:34:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51310 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kolBl-0007bB-9Y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 05:34:45 -0500 Received: from mail.zaclys.net ([178.33.93.72]:53451) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kolBi-0007ax-UG for 41669@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 05:34:43 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.27] (82-64-145-38.subs.proxad.net [82.64.145.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.zaclys.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0BEAYZ6P016725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:34:35 +0100 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.zaclys.net 0BEAYZ6P016725 Authentication-Results: mail.zaclys.net; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=zaclys.net Authentication-Results: mail.zaclys.net; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=lle-bout@zaclys.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zaclys.net; s=default; t=1607942076; bh=1/9nC5JiObGDFVb/mcqztEWp6hw0YyroOgHO5JGVSpE=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=f202olMxzHdnvtnGueB+KNn5FWY7IRqPcLo4tF+nzRaP5tlmQTNY7eNz96PHq5fDR r9wG2wMBwzLLi3yiWxODpjmU9LoRQb9Ao59cPkdiDpZ6e4N1NU1SAGKbnxQirwHBYE 0bA9OKBeyoXtZ8/bcyXybHmAorGZnLdjwRdb8kQY= Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#41669: Cross-compiled powerpc64-linux bootstrap-tarballs not reproducible From: Leo Le Bouter To: Efraim Flashner Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:34:35 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <874krtnvk8.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> <87a6xu2xrj.fsf@gmail.com> <20200913062858.GC1100@E5400> <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <87pn5wzwcf.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn3dth0l.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <874kkoyebq.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 41669 Cc: 41669@debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , Chris Marusich , Maxim Cournoyer , Vincent Legoll 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: -1.0 (-) On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 12:27 +0200, Efraim Flashner wrote: > but I wouldn't count on > maintaining a separate glibc for powerpc64le vs the rest of the > architectures. It doesnt need to be maintained, it only needs to work in one commit on master and then one uses time-machine to rebuild the bootstrap binaries if they wish to. The make-bootstrap code is already unmaintained for every architecture anyway since we never rebuild bootstrap binaries using later GNU Guix revisions ever. > Do you have a preference big-endian vs little endian? I'd like both but little endian has the widest eco-system support especially w.r.t. to Linux drivers. Many Linux drivers have endianness bugs (lack of endian-safe serialization for DMA..), it's such a plague that sticking to little endian is just better right now. One common example being mpt3sas and amdgpu drivers required in some configurations of the Talos II system.