Re: Why is IceCat now only 'supported' on Intel-systems?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> skribis:

> According to:
>
>   https://hydra.gnu.org/eval/109381?filter=icecat#tabs-removed
>
> the jobs for icecat on armhf and mips64el were removed in evaluation
> 109381 (corresponding to commit 663d5b5), but were present in the
> previous evaluation 109380 (commit cd65d60).
>
> Can anyone tell me why this happened?

“git diff 663d5b5..cd65d60 | grep supported-sy” shows nothing.
I don’t see anything obvious in the logs.

Indeed:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(guix)
scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(gnu packages gnuzilla)
scheme@(guile-user)> (package-supported-systems icecat)
$2 = ("x86_64-linux" "i686-linux" "armhf-linux" "mips64el-linux")
scheme@(guile-user)> (system* "git" "describe")
v0.11.0-3128-gd30e578
$3 = 0
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

In the current evaluation IceCat is there on all arches, though it only
succeeds on x86_64:

  
https://hydra.gnu.org/eval/109382?filter=icecat&compare=109381&full=#tabs-now-succeed

> I find it disturbing that we seem to be in the habit of removing
> non-Intel systems from 'supported-systems' fields in packages that other
> distros are able to get working on non-Intel.  These are bugs to be
> fixed, not swept under the rug to get them out of sight.

Everyone will agree with that, and everyone will agree that Someone must
fixed said bugs.

There’s also a practical issue not to be swept under the rug: when we
keep rebuilding known-to-fail packages on those architectures, we waste
build resources.

Ludo’.