Hi Danny,

[email protected] skribis:

> commit f7228e317703808a8a193f6db8a3cb6ba5380f2f
> Author: Danny Milosavljevic <[email protected]>
> AuthorDate: Sat May 2 14:48:29 2020 +0200
>
>     gnu: Add musl-cross.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/patches/musl-cross-locate.patch: New file.
>     * gnu/packages/heads.scm: New file.
>     * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add one.
>     (GNU_SYSTEM_MODULES): Add the other.

[...]

> +(define-public musl-cross
> +  (let ((revision "3")
> +        (commit "a8a66490dae7f23a2cf5e256f3a596d1ccfe1a03"))
> +  (package
> +    (name "musl-cross")

It’s an unconventional way to provide a cross-toolchain.  What about
expressing along the lines of what cross-base.scm does?

I understand cross-base.scm is becoming messy and we would need an
abstraction to facilitate its use.  Still, to me it sounds like a better
option over big monolithic packages.

WDYT?

Ludo’.

Reply via email to