Re: RFC: Portability should be a higher priority for Guix (was Re: 01/01: build-system/meson: Really skip the 'fix-runpath' phase on armhf.)

[Jonathan Brielmaier]

On 7/5/18 12:32 AM, Kei Kebreau wrote:
>> I'm open to suggestions.  Do you see any solution to the problem of how
>> to attract more non-x86_64 users, given our current policies?
>>
>>      Thanks,
>>        Mark
> 
> I am interested in helping with non-x86_64 issues. Particularly, helping
> with i686-related changes should be just a change in workflow, but I'm
> interested in obtaining freedom-respecting non-x86 hardware (or at least
> using a virtual machine as close as possible to real hardware
> configurations). Any recommendation or links for where I can get a
> Yeeloong laptop or what freedom-respecting armhf computers are
> available?

I just want to bring POWER up as a freedom-respecting architecture.
Especially the TalosII from RaptorCS[0]. I know that guix does not work
on ppc64le yet, but I'm working for it :) They tend to be quite
expensive, but you get a decent performance on compiling and packing[1].

Regarding ARM hardware: I have access to a bunch of performant ARM
machines (Cavium Thunder, AMD ARM stuff etc.) at work. So feel free to
drop me a mail or set me to CC, if you need something to be tested on ARM :)

[0] https://raptorcs.com/
[1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=power9-talos-2&num=3