From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-GM-THRID: 6482619450789986304 X-Gmail-Labels: Topic type: DISCUSSION X-Received: by 10.25.207.193 with SMTP id f184mr72601lfg.31.1509464098063; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:34:58 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: isar-users@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.46.82.14 with SMTP id g14ls2436240ljb.0.gmail; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:34:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+QWkZbYRt7gj7vIt2+ZJy/A8WWiCLR3OtHofAo+y8F3iJv0jPCad/sWCn9g1QIZvrUNmdtS X-Received: by 10.46.56.8 with SMTP id f8mr82541lja.21.1509464097441; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:34:57 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1509464097; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gFHu5/Fa5JfvWcDir/ozprSvyn9WQw5RzZe4824uta54TDrTaqiU8GcTTvuJm4IwH3 NQwixN3ZIh75HS04HNJ1CMotZ4wPcyvxOmSlZFEBfdJ87Rw22EFXGZEy+f7Qc6XbXmHI Y7Gw2/QH6PgYRpBMjC9hoi63KDeKP5N9x74uOS8UFSOPszjkdbGBNA9udWNyhDlx6Tzb thh12SpgmMKjW87bPmR0oEoh95UBaeDTkasNByw69hSPwpnLEej/2SwCdJjzlau3Se4w 0g649eY6QHtsO8obDyLx65Hh45R8XWU4NdixlCha7y21hV3467kqyXkEpJVKCmo1ygxW d1bQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=5WS2UAfmKPMjvkBKYgEERHt08r7xgK2PjNJ3LAPkNZU=; b=MGLyd1uExW9HUb8dqtBAHiJEJIIvMqOwg7PML1a7MA52PEFX+FGIeaBy0V0OmG+svI TujPwiDLk9CZ3Leiy3IYDfI9EvQaLNeBJDcS/QmMrQczF003sYSmsD35byJbjPDUJzem VxsoUasfIP3zPmeZLvIQ/QmlLLbcSLUlw39cjlj70ySeSo0+qcUIAEZBol1huaHzCalI c9qGKwBXoBrz92/YLPvKB4ftDYXJTWNCBWyBfMwbgIerVpaOlfc65nk5J6znjKAdkKlr 0xnctEDPWa9iLiMRaiuHtB5RpgKtmYf27d9YEm8HluBQ0OkAbLF3Bt0BTlHKggtEs34k hi3w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Return-Path: Received: from aqmola.ilbers.de (aqmola.ilbers.de. [85.214.62.211]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c23si97988ljf.4.2017.10.31.08.34.56 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:34:57 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) client-ip=85.214.62.211; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 85.214.62.211 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ibr@radix50.net) smtp.mailfrom=ibr@radix50.net Received: from yssyq.radix50.net (ipservice-092-219-221-042.092.219.pools.vodafone-ip.de [92.219.221.42]) (authenticated bits=0) by aqmola.ilbers.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id v9VFYsoZ020635 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 16:34:55 +0100 Received: from yssyq.radix50.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yssyq.radix50.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8) with ESMTP id v9VFYnds011755 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 16:34:49 +0100 Received: (from ibr@localhost) by yssyq.radix50.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id v9VFYnFn011754 for isar-users@googlegroups.com; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 16:34:49 +0100 Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 16:34:49 +0100 From: Baurzhan Ismagulov To: isar-users Subject: Re: Cross-building and debugging Message-ID: <20171031153449.GD5385@yssyq.radix50.net> Mail-Followup-To: isar-users References: <0b55db7d-e602-4f4b-b6d5-bc1c0a0e18e8@googlegroups.com> <20171030144305.21dcf20c@md1em3qc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171030144305.21dcf20c@md1em3qc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-TUID: 9bgSLZaq0xph On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 02:43:05PM +0100, Henning Schild wrote: > If you ask me now, cross compile support should not be added to Isar, > because it is against what Debian is doing. Debian happens not to cross-build due to various reasons. That said, cross-building isn't officially prohibited. In fact, Emdebian, debian-cross, and debian-bootstrap are using it. There were mass bug filings that resulted IIRC in a couple of hundred packages accepting cross-building patches. I'm also very curious what debian-mobile comes up with. You are right that without testing, those changes would bitrot. The efforts above are not a part of the official Debian infrastructure yet, but there are discussions about that. > If the only upside of such complexity is gain in speed i would probably > reject patches that try to introduce something like that. The efforts of e.g. debian-bootstrap is to be able to reproducibly bootstrap any arch from zero. This is an important ability for any distro, desktop or embedded. The implementation involves installing the compiler and passing the right options to configure and dpkg-buildpackage, which we do already for native building. So, additional complexity is marginal. Debugging may be one level more complex, but cross-building is officially supported in Debian tools. Isar itself doesn't impose one or another way of building, so the user would choose whichever one is suitable for him -- individually for debug or release builds of the same working copy. Build times are critical in times where developers are scarce and their time is expensive. The slower the development loop, the more is the developer blocked. And what is not tested doesn't work. This is one of the reasons Isar explicitly cares for performance -- as the last but not least aspect. > With the > recently merged cache features one could just keep the .debs and the > compile-time would only be a problem once and maybe for CI. The initial "cache" name turned out to be unfortunate and has caused much confusion. The idea behind the feature is to provide mechanism for deploying to apt repos. The policy -- i.e., how the users are going to use it -- is up to them. The intended use cases are: 1. Hardware vendors providing layers for Isar with their source and binary packages (kernel modules, libraries, tools, etc.). 2. Product builders managing binary artifacts as a part of their CM, especially safety-oriented processes. And sharing the binary artifacts between the developers to speed up build times is a nice add-on. > Today you could use dpkg-raw and just package your binaries, that maybe > came from another build-system. In the long run, I'd like to see that extended to a more Debian way, Isar generating debian/rules on the fly. With kind regards, Baurzhan.